Google
This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project
to make the world’s books discoverable online.
It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that’s often difficult to discover.
Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book’s long journey from the
publisher to a library and finally to you.
Usage guidelines
Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:
+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individual
personal, non-commercial purposes.
and we request that you use these files for
+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google’s system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.
+ Maintain attribution The Google “watermark” you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.
+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can’t offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book’s appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.
About Google Book Search
Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world’s books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web
ai[http: //books . google. com/|
THE EXISTING MONOPOLY,
AN INADEQUATE PROTECTION, OF THE. AUTHORISED
VERSION OF SCRIPTURE. .
Ne FOUR LETTERS
To the Right Hon, and
RIGHT REV. THE LORD BISHOP OF LONDON;
WITH
SPECIMENS OF THE INTENTIONAL, AND OTHER DEPARTURES
FROM THE AUTHORISED STANDARD.
7
To WHICH 18 ADDED,
& POSTSCRIPT,
‘Containing
THE “‘ COMPLAINTS” OF A LONDON COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS ON THE
SUBJECT; THE REPLY OF THE UNIVERSITIES;
AND A REPORT ON THE IMPORTANCE OF THE ALTERATIONS MADE.
BY THOMAS CURTIS,
“ oF GROVE HOUSE, ISLINGTON—SECRETARY TO THE COMMITTER.
Denyse ppp me Ghys mrve apa nriny mnow mane pon Ps. xii. 7. (Hed.)
« Every sentence, every ward, every syllable, every letter and point [of
the greatest precision. If accuracy, fidelity, a1 ‘and the strictest attention to the letter of the text.
be supposed to She a the qualies of ax excellent Version, this [tho Authorised secs of ali
‘Versions must in general be considered the most excellent.” ‘A, Geddes,
‘That which is but carelessness in other books, 1s fmploty In putting forth the Bibl.
"Fuller.
« Mr. CURTIS appeals to the public: we wish the public to be our jadges.*
‘Dr. Burton to the Bishop of Calcutta, May 22.
LONDON :
EFFINGHAM WILSON, ROYAL EXCHANGE; STRAKER, HIGH HOLBORN ;
L, J. HIGHAM, CHISWELL STREET; AND STARLING, UPPER STREET,
ISLINGTON.
MDCCCXXXII,
Luther did not live to conduct through the Press the edition of his German New Testament,
published in 1846, which, however, he corrected, and left the following characteristic Address to
be printed on the back of the title. (It is to be wished that a similar caution had been inserted in
the front of our Bibles.)
“Doctor MARTIN LUTHER. I request my friends and my foes, my masters, printers,
«“ and readers, to Jet this New Testament continue mine. If they find faults in it, let them make
“another. I know well what I make; I see also well what others make. But this Testament
« shall remain LUTHER’S German Testament. Now-a-days there is neither measure nor end
“af making and bettering. Let every man, therefore, take heed of faise coptes. For I know
« how. unfaithfully and untruly others have reprinted what I have printed.»—Marsh’s Michaelis’
Introd v. IV. p. 439.
Counting the words only which are altered in (he modern Bibles, and a few of the paragraph
mmarks, which are important; that is, not at all including the general alterations of the orthography
or minute punctuation, there appear—
INTENTIONAL DEPARTURES FROM KING JAMES BIBLE.
Inthe Bookof... Genesis.,..containing 60 Chap... . 807
Exodus ee @eeseoeees 40... .020- 724
Psalms ......25: ~- 150.......- 600
Lamentations ..... oe Beeeeeee 5D
St. Matthew's Gospel. . 28....... 416
Hebrews oo. cee eee Weegee U7
Revelation ....6.0.0+ Weeweeeee 178
308 2931
Or, in about one-fourth of the Bible, upwards of Two Thousand Nine Hundred such departures,
suggesting the presumption, that there are upwards of Eleven Thousand in the entire Version.
1) . ‘ by -
;' . } . a | ape *
i* » © . ‘ sa
ADVERTISEMENT.
Brixvine that obedience to a Divine command “Search,” Epevrate,
investigate, ‘‘ the Scriptures,” (addressed to all who possess them) is
at issue, I fearlessly produce this case. This command cannot, in the
present state of our Bibles, be complied with so advantageously, by the
British public, as it might have been, two hundred years ago.* If
the general reader begin in earnest to search the English Scriptures,
he must ask, What do these italic’ mean ? What, these small capital -
letters? And what, the presence of the latter in many thousand
passages of the University Bibles, from which they are excluded by
his Majesty’s Printers?+ The answers to these questions will fre-
quently implicate either the Authorised Translators in considerable
error, and indefensible negligence; or their modern Emendators in
uncalled for, unwarranted, and even ignorant criticism :—not here
to dwell on the startling omission of a promised RepEEMeEr (see p. 9,
note) in one Bible who appears in others, (indeed in all correct
ones) and a host of Typographical errors, which should induce the
Universities to buy up and destroy particular editions.
If, zealous in the defence of our Translators, to the annoyance,
doubtless, of all those who have trifled with, or would impugn their
labors, I have occasionally exhibited what may be thought an exces-
sive attachment to their memory, my apology is—they are absent,
disinterested, ‘‘ no more in this world ;” and that often
their ashes flew,
No marble tells us whither.
Their labors and their memory indeed, appear in many instances,
to have been alike neglected.
My humble request to the learned and impartial reader, is, that
he would carefully watch the issue of this discussion, and weigh well
* Since which period, according to Professor Lee, (see Preface to his Hebrew Grammar) oriental
learning has, in this country, retrograded, rather than advanced. Professor Stuart, of Andover,U.S.
appears to confirm this, I cannot omit his euloginm on our Authorised Translation. “Itis,” he
says, “on the whole, a most noble production. The. divines of that day were very different
Hebrew scholars from what most of their successors have been in England and Scotland,
With the exception of Bishop Lowth’s classic work on Isaiah, no other effort at transiation among
the English divines will compare either in respect to taste, judgment, or sound understanding of
the Hebrew, with the Authorised Version.”
+ As in some of the ‘ beautiful’ editions (as they arc called by Mr. Horne) of the late Mr. Reeves.
King’s Printer.
iv
the representations of the living, interested, and powerful defenders of
the past and present University systems. Dr. Paley has well said in an
inquiry which he was too prudent to pursue, ‘‘ The man who attacks
a flourishing Establishment, writes with a halter round his neck ;’’
that ‘‘ few,” therefore, will ‘“‘ ever be found to attempt alterations,
but men of more spirit than prudence, of more sincerity than caution;
of warm, eager, and impetuous tempers; that consequently, if we
are to wait for improvement till the cool, the calm, the discreet part
of mankind begin it, tid? Church Governors solicit, or Ministers of
State propose it, I will venture to pronounce that (without His inter-
position with Whom nothing is impossible) we may remain as we are,
to the renovation of all things.”’*
While, however, the writer has been taught, by this blessed
to fear no human opposition, or opprobrium, in the cause of G«
Author, he can with great sincerity state, that he has not will
nor without great personal pain, brought forward any fact that
seem to have the tendency of depreciating others, or that can giv:
pain; and that he long hoped to be excused this unwelcome
" He adds, in the words of the earliest vindicator of English Holy
** I take God, which alone searcheth the heart, to record to m
science, if I wrote of all that I have written—aught, of any evi
pose, of envy or malice to any man; to stir up any false doctr
opinion in the church of Christ; or that I should be esteemed or
had in price above the least child that is born. But to weed out all
that our heavenly Father hath not planted, and to bring down all
that lifteth up itself against the knowledge of the salvation that
is in the blood of Christ.”—Tinpat.
*,* During the considerable period that has elapsed since my attention was first called to this
matter, I beg to add, that I have seen abundant reason no longer to dissent from the presumed
opinion of the House of Commons’ Committee, alluded to p. 11.
There is no kind of adequate benefit for which the British Public should pay from Forty to
Fifty Thousand Pounds per Annum to the Authorised Printers of the Bible, This at least would
appear to be paid on its entire supply, over and above what the Bible might olherwise be procured
for—a tax on the noblest and most needful knowledge, I would hope, aud do believe, quite unpa-
ralleled. A judicious friend calculates that the Bible Society alone pays Twenty-four Thousand
Pounds annually above what it could print its English Bibles for, if the monopoly were broken up.
Precautions in breaking it up might be necessary, but need not cost the country a twentieth part
of this tax.
* See a pamphlet, in Vindication of Bishop Law, in the controversy respecting Subscription, 1774.
THE
EXISTING MONOPOLY AN INADEQUATE PROTECTION,
&c. &c.
ene,
m- I$ NO INSTANCE ON RECORD, IN
Mein: A GREAT PUBLIC WORK OF A LITE.
eos, JUCTED WITH SUCH ANXIOUS CARE
het me iE PRESENT AUTHORISED TRANSLA-
le “rh. uh ‘iew, xivi.
lie eae _
twa a me
GROVE HOUSE, ISLINGTON,
July 8, 1832.
aan { your Lordship in the Esta-
blished Church, and the zeal with which its functions have
been exercised, might be alone, perhaps, admitted as my
apology, for thus addressing myself to your Lordship.
May I not hope, my Lord, now that the University of Ox-
ford is so far roused as publicly to notice the *‘ Complaints’”’*
which have been made on the subject of these Letters, some
of them more than twelve months ago, that the Established
Church also will assert her character and rights as a deposi-
|
* << Complaints having been made that the English Bibles printed at the
Universities, besides necessary alterations in the spelling, differ greatly from
the Authorised Version of the Scriptures, the Delegates of the Oxford Press
have caused collations to be made preparatory to a careful consideration of
the subject. They have also commenced an exact reprint, in roman letter, of
the Authorised Version printed in the year 1611, in /arge black letter,"folio,”’
(Notice prefixed to ‘‘ The Book of Genesis, an exact reprint, page for page, of
the Authorised Version published in the year 1611.”)
4
2
tary of God’s word? With those rights, considered legally,
I am but little acquainted; but this character we have the
highest authority for attributing under both the Old and New
Covenants, to the true Church of God:* and I am well as-
sured that there is not any thing in which the Rulers of the
Church could at this juncture do the State more service, or
more happily conciliate all churches and parties, who through-
out the world use our language, than in complying with the
request which I humbly urged upon your Lordship at London
House, that the Established Church would protect effectually
her own excellent Version of Scripture.
I will come at once to my chief point—one to which
(much to the satisfaction of my friends and myself) the De-
legates of the Oxford Press seem at last disposed to attend.
‘‘ Besides necessary alterations in the spelling,’ our mo-
dern Bibles “DIFFER GREATLY [AND INTENTIONALLY] FROM
THE AUTHORISED VERSION.’ I presume to contend that
they ought ot at all critically to differ from that Version.
By reprinting the Edition of 1611, the Oxford Delegates
either mean to dispute the matter of fact, or to deny the
-principle thus stated; — and which zs their meaning, my
Lord, I really find it difficult to understand. They mean,
perhaps, to assert for the Universities, some right to alter
the successive reprints of our public Version, according to
their own judgment of its merits! Here, then, I venture to
join issue with them; affirming the fact of material critical
alterations, denying their right to make any. Charging it,
in plain terms, my Lord, as an abuse of their privilege of
being the pro tempore Printers of the Version; indeed as
using that privilege so as directly to defeat the chief object
for which it was bestowed, z.e. to preserve the PUBLIC and
AUTHORISED, @ SETTLED and UNIFORM Version. This is my
chief point.
In addition to this, my Lord, I allege that down to a very
late period the Holy Scriptures have been most carelessly
* Rom. ili. 2. and Jude 3.
3
printed at the Authorised Presses; so that the Typographical
errors in Bibles still on sale and constantly in use (particularly
amongst the poor) are, in the present improved state of the
printing art, disgraceful. In the Bibles printed within the
last ten or twelve years there is a decided improvement in this
respect, particularly in those of the Clarendon Press; but the
character of all the Authorised Bibles in common use belongs,
I must contend, to the Authorised Printers; belongs materially
to the history of a privilege which has been in very profitable
exercise for above two centuries.
Competent judges will not therefore deny, that my topics
bear generally and considerably on the duties of the Established
Church, as well as on those of the Universities and King’s
Printers. The Rev. Mr. Lewis, our principal historian ‘ of the
several Translations of the Holy Bible and New Testament,”
furnishes me with another reason, I presume, why the attention
of the Bishop of London may be consistently called to these
points. He states, that after the “careless printing” of “this
Holy Book grew to that height” early in the last century—
that complaint was made to King George I. of their being
printed on bad paper, and with bad letter; as also that ‘due
care had not been used in correcting the press: His Ma-
jesty having caused this complaint to be inquired into, was
pleased to order. his patentee for printing these books—to
employ such “correctors of the press as shall be appointed
from time to time by the Archbishop of Canterbury and
Bishop of London for the time being.’’ This order, he says,
was dated Whitehall, April 24, 1724.* I cannot find either
that it ever has been rescinded, or that it has been acted upon
to any beneficial extent. Certain I am that the learned pre-
lates who filled these high offices in the year 1811, could
not have approved of the alterations then introduced by the
King’s Printer into at least two extensive editions of the Holy |
Bible, i. e. the entire omission of all the original titles of the
Psalms, as well as of all distinction throughout the Old Testa-
* Lewis’ History, 8vo. Eton, 1739, p. 351.
4
ment in printing those various Divine names, which are
designated by the term Lord: alterations which alone in-
volve upwards of 6,500 errors.
But I have a further reason, my Lord, and I confess it was,
with me, the deciding one, for addressing these papers to.
your Lordship. I am compelled to call upon your Lordship
as the best witness I can obtain, on a very particular part of
this momentous case, wherein the principal or direct witness
declines to appear. .
I turned to your Lordship, on the general grounds which I
have stated, above a year ago, with the earnest wish of
inducing the Established Church silently and promptly to
influence the correction of the abuses in question; when you
were pleased to assure me of the entire coincidence of your
Lordship’s views with mine, as to the principle on which the
legislature and the country had so long upheld the monopoly
of the Bible (on this principle it will be necessary to dwell
hereafter) ; and, not conceiving it needful to consult me as
to this use of my papers, regarding them as, in their humble
way, affecting a question of general interest—you sent them
to Cambridge.
You were pleased to state to me, my Lord, who was the im-
portant functionary that received them, and to promise me a
further communication on his reply. Your Lordship sent me
thatreply. It acknowledged the receipt of my papers, and the
obligations of the University to their author. It was, as I con-
ceived, the virtual answer of your Lordship and your friend
to my inquiry, ‘What were the methods which the University
had taken (as you were “assured” such measures had been
taken) to secure future correctness?’
Now, my Lord, this reply I state advisedly, and after twelve
months close attention to the subject, to be the most remark-
able paper in the modern history of the transmission of the
Holy Scriptures. It affirmed more than all IJ feared, as to the
manner in which the public interests in this most serious
business had been compromised at one University: it demon-
strated that there was no common system, nor common con-
5
cord between the Universities, in the discharge of this trust :
it decided me, therefore, on grounds of public duty, not to re-
linquish the pursuit of the business, which, as your Lordship
knows, I had, under very painful circumstances, intended: it
took me to Cambridge to communicate with the very able
writer...... After all, I believe your Lordship will prevail on
that writer to permit its publication, though he refuses it to
me:—but on a great public question like the present, I must
thus far, [ must even in self-vindication, advert to his letter. It
stated, as I shall never forget, that the Cambridge authorities
would print the Bible correctly—if they “did but know the
standard to be followed ;’’ it asked your Lordship for ‘any
intelligence’’ respecting ‘‘ a standard ;’’ and it professed, on
these subjects an utter want of confidence in “the Oxford
men.” [ am constrained to appeal to your Lordship as a wit-
ness that I do not misrepresent the learned writer.
. But enough, perhaps, my Lord, of apology for addressing
your Lordship on such a subject. Some of my readers, I
know, will think that a serious one is also required of me,
for bringing it at this juncture before the public.
I have been told in one high and influential quarter that
there is a christian as well as a political mob, and that the
mere mob can be no judges of such questions as may be here
brought before them. Iam warned against unsettling the minds
of the public, and shaking the confidence of the unlearned
in the text of Scripture; as well as against giving occasion
to the infidel to throw fresh calumnies upon the blessed book
and its friends.... My answer to all this is, that I adopt from
the Scripture itself a higher view of the most illiterate real
christian than the first objector can entertain. That humble
christian may be, as Bishop Horsley, I think, has happily
phrased it, ‘learned only in his Bible,” but this will protect
him from any spiritual danger in this discussion. He will
neither at any time be so “ soon shaken in mind” as many who
leok scornfully down upon him from the mole-hills of a little
secular learning; nor be without important means of under-
standing my chief allegations. He will even aid me consider-
—~¢6
ably in urging others to feel them. The humblest christian
who can read my statements, “ searches the scriptures ;” un-
derstands as well as any of his neighbours that the prophets
spake in “times past,” and Jesus Christ for all time; that
the book is therefore one of “ sundry times and divers man-
ners.” He does not require to be taught that its writers
were not Englishmen, and that he owes much to the really
learned. He knows it to be a translation; and his teachers
either should have informed him (as I believe in the vast ma-
jority of cases they will have done) or ought at once to bring
before him the fact—that the translation was settled two
hundred years ago, under that King “ James,” whose name
it generally bears: and that it was given for its protection,
to those of whom alone he can obtain it. |
The plainest Englishman, therefore, can understand my
princtples—my chief point: can understand that he ought to
confide in the text of his Bible, as in a physician’s prescrip-
tion: and ought to take equal care that no one ‘correct’ it,
‘while he is on his way to profit by it: that what a body of
learned men have publicly agreed upon, a few learned men
in a corner ought not to alter; and that a public document
should not be tinkered* by a private hand.
With regard to unsettling those who in all such discussions
are watching to find a pretence against Christianity, I have
waited a considerable period deprecating this; and for those
_ to remedy the evils of which I complain, whose duty I know
it is; but whose disposition I doubt whether it be.... waited,
until men of unquestionable learning and general competence
to the question, aver that the alterations in our modern Bibles
do of themselves ** unnecessarily expose the sacred text to the
scoffs of infidels,’ and ‘throw such stumbling-blocks in the
way of the unlearned as are greatly calculated to perplex
their minds.” And now, as I feel, my Lord, the period of
‘¢ silent waiting’ is past. All honest men who see these
* The expressive phrase of our old divines, lately quoted by the Christian
Observer, about the projected alterations in the Liturgy.
7
abuses as I do, will exert every effort to induce their abate-
ment. I can, at any rate no longer, honestly, be silent.
Of these Letters, I propose to occupy the ferst and second
with my various Applicatious. to, and Correspondence with,
the learned heads of the Church and Universities during the
last year: thus furnishing to my readers conveniently, as I
conceive, the sources of such information as I have to offer
them on this subject. My ¢hird. will be devoted to the me-
morable instructions and undertakings of Mr. (afterwards
Dr.) Blayney, in 1769. The fourth, to Specimens of the
modern and existing typographical errors and intentional
alterations of the sacred text.
Your Lordship will, perhaps, excuse the form of continued
narrative in: which the first.and second: Letters must for the
greater part appear. The materials have been for some time
collected, and I find myself too much pressed by various du-
ties wholly to remould them. —
Karly in the. spring of last year, having observed in the
public papers that a Committee of the House of Commons
was appointed to investigate the duties of His Majesty’s
Printers, I offered to communicate to the Chairman some
instances of what I then regarded as typographical errors in
the modern Bibles. I thought they bore upon the question
of the due discharge of that office, and that passing to the
Printers through such a channel, they were pretty sure of
being rectified. It had come to my knowledge that gross
errors remained uncorrected, in many instances, fur years—
indeed the Bibles of my family furnished proof of it.* .
* I could not then have conjectured that some gross errors had been pointed
out to one of the Universities ¢wenty years before; the list of them acknow-
ledged to be received......a8 modicum of reward assigned the poor but intelli- ~
gent Printer’s reader who furnished them; and his character acknowledged as
that of a person well qualified for the task of revising an edition of the Bible
woe» the passages moreover all said to be “ right’? in the Standard edition
(that standard being Dr. Blayney’s)...... Yet that some of the grossest of these
errors should be found in Dr. Blayney’s Bible and Apocrypha, and others of
8
It was in the daily course of reading the Scriptures
with my family and pupils, that the modern errors had
been of late brought continually before me. [| found it
a good method of securing attention, for each one to read
a verse or two in succession. But on furnishing them with
the modern University Bibles, and bringing those of my
family into use, very few days would pass without the dis-
covery of some variation in the copies. Let any master of
a large household take the Bibles of the Universities, for
the last twenty years, into perpetual reading in this way, and
he will soon find discrepancies that disgrace them. Thus,
I remember, we found the remarkable error of heart for
“hart,” in the 48nd Psalm v. 1., destroying the chief beauty
and force of the opening of the Psalm. (It is in two Cam-
them remain unaltered to the present day. Unaltered ones are Gen. xlix. 26.
thy for my progenitors—Judges xi. 9. inte for unto my place—Dan. xi. 38,
margin, God’s protectors, for gods, protectors (i. e. protecting false deities) —
Esth. (Apoc.) xii. 6. two, before ‘‘eunuchs’’ omitted—Ecclus. xi. 25. more added
after no—another is found four years afterwards—Judg. xi. 7. children for elders,
of Gilead. Of these facts { have vouchers before me, and trace the information
in question to the Vice-Chancellor of the University.
I ought to add, that the poor man, when remonstrating on the subject of
being ill-rewarded, was told that his list was of ‘‘ no practical utility.” It
contained 731 errors between the beginning of Genesis and the end of Jeremiah,
all occurring, in a quarto Bible at that time on sale, and from which as a standard
he was employed, he states, to correct the popular Bible of the late Rev.
Mr. Hewlett.
Was this 4to. Bible ever called in? No. I recently bought it in Holborn.
The list would then have been of “practical utility.” Were the errors ever
carefully examined? No. The preceding instances could not then have
remained. Yet the Vice-Chancellor vouches they were “all right.’’
Some of these errors of ‘‘ no practical utility’? to point out, were as follow:
I. Wrona or SusstiruTED Worps.
Gen. vii. 11.—Foundations, for fountains of the great deep.
Exod. iv. 10.—my, for thy servant, entirely changing the sense, and substi-
tuting another person for Moses, as one to whom God had spoken.
Lev, xxvi. 4.—her, for their fruit.
Deut. xii. 17.—thy, for the tithe of thy corn, making the tithe the people’s.
Judges ix. 53.—break for brake; a common error, but destroying the only
record of an historical fact.
-
9
bridge Editiond of 1830, of different sizes.) The substitu-
tion of Gilead for Gideon, in the book of Judges, vii. 5.
Oxford, 1801; of Sion for Sihon, in the 11th chapter, v.20,
of the same book ; ‘ cease to bring forth,’ for cause to bring
forth, Isa. lxvi. 9. Oxford, 1820, and several other errors,
were also thus discovered.
Long before this, my Lord, I had seen something prac- —
tically of the mere bonne bouche for a political partizan,
which the office of King’s Printer had become with the late
Mr. Reeves, a barrister; and had personally known the book-
sellers, to whom (as the highest bidders for it) he had regu-
larly leased out, at a certain rate per annum, his right (!)
of printing Gop’s Worp and the Prayer Book. One of the
surviving clerks of the house told me not long ago, that it
was understood they gave him for some years a thousand
pounds per annum for the privilege of working this branch
of his patent. ’
Judges x. 12.—Moabites for Maonites.
Judges xi. 7.— Children for elders of Gilead.
1 Sam. xxxi. 13.—-fasten, for fasted seven days ; wholly destroying the sense
and the record of a great mark of respect to Saul and his sons.
1 Sam. xxii. and 2 Sam. xxiv.—(Contents.) Three instances of God for Gad.
2 Chron. xxvi.23.—head for stead ; making nonsense, ‘‘ reigned in his head.”
Job xxxvi. 9.—transgressions that they have executed for exceeded ; an im-
portant diminution of the sense.
Psalm v, 7.—table for temple; worship toward thy holy table. Popery!
Psalm xxxi. 23.—plentifully rewardest the proud door for dver.
Prov. xxii. 14.—4 strange woman for strange women.
Is. vit. 23.— silverings for silverlings, a coin. (Also in 8yvo. ref. Oxford, 110.)
Isaiah xxiv. 11.—darkness for darkened.
Isaiah lix. 20.—remainder for REDEEMER; a direct and most important pro-
phecy of the Messiah, quoted and reasoned upon as such in New Testament,
Rom. xi. 26.
Isaiah Ix. 15.—many nations for many generations. Another strong promise
of God materially marred and subtracted from, It is an expletive of “ eternal
excellency.”’
Jeremiah |. 12.—nation for nations; it may thus mean either the Jews or
their enemies. .
Ezek, xxx. 14.—Zion for Zoan; a severe threatening changed as to its object.
Ezek. xxxv. 1l.—make thyself for myself known among them. Another
great promise obliterated.
10 ;
These (his lessees) were men not more than competent
to.preserve Dyche’s Spelling-book in regular transmission ;
men of quite a second order in their trade; and they employed
uncontrolled, as far as the world ever knew, their own Printer
and Stationer, to execute this purchased sacred trust. At
any rate they produced two large successive editions of the
Holy Scriptures, (one of which I possess, au 18mo. of 1811)
that entirely obliterate, as I have already observed, one of
the most striking peculiarities in the typography of the.
Authorized Version, 2. e. the mode of printing certain Divine
Names—a distinction which conveys to the mere English.
reader important proof of the Divinity of our blessed Lord.
I attended the Committee of the House of Commons,
sometime in the month of March, 1831; taking with me
Hosea viii. 1.—-angel, for eagle.
Zech. ix. marg.—-whose covenant is my for by blood.
Zech, xi. 17.—idle, for idol, Also in Oxford, 8vo. 1801.
Wisdom i. 5.—righteousness for unrighteousness.
Il.— OMITTED Worps.
Gen. iii. 19.—QOut it, for out of it.
Numb. i. 3.—By armies for by their armies.
Numb. xxxi. 20.—made, after things. .
2 Chron, xxix. 23.— He before goats.
Ezra x. 6.—0f before God; making it house—God. ‘‘ Ezra rose up from
before the house Ged.”’
Psalm xxvi. 7.—ali before thy wondrous works,
Psalm cxix. 73.— me, after fashioned.
Prov. xxi. 5.—of after bué; destroying the statement of a contrast.
Eccl. xi. 6.—doth, after they ; weakening the sense.
Jer. viii. 12.—aé after not—not all for not at all ashamed; a wholly different
sense.
Jer, xxxii. 42.—great, before evil; describing one of God’s greatest ancient
judgments, and promising an equal good.
Hab. i. 9.—up after sup, destroying the figure ‘‘sup up ;"” that is, desolate,
destroy “‘ as the east wind.”’
II].—REDUNDANT OR INSERTED Worps.
Judges xx, 21.—oué, before ground.
2 Kings ii, 15.—¢hey bowed themselves—éhey inserted.
Psalm xii. 6.—¢he, before carth—a furnace of carth.
dsaiah xxviii. 21.—be, after may—that he (God) may be do his work!
1}
the Bibles in which I had found discrepancies. They were
but a fraction of the number which has since appeared :*
but I felt at this period considerable doubt as to the expe-
diency of the plan which I understood the Committee was
inclined to recommend to the Honorable House; i. e. that
of entirely breaking up the monopoly-of. printing the Bible.
On this ground, and in unfeigned respect for the Church of
England, as the original translator of our excellent Version,
I listened to the assurance of a clerical friend of high cha-.
racter, that “the Bishops of London, Chester, or Winchester,
would readily give their best attention to the case ;’’ and first
addressed myself, April 9, 1831, to your Lordship.
From my Notes of the interview with which your Lordship
honored me, I extract these particulars.
When I observed that one would willingly attribute the
wisest motives to the Legislature, and that, I apprehended, we
might correctly regard the privileges of the Authorised Prin-
ters as given in the nature of public trusts for the protection
of the text, your Lordship replied, “ OA/ certainly; and if it
cannot be proved that this has been upon the whole the result,
there can be no pretence for preserving the monopolies.’’+
I said there was a strong case bearing that way: that the
* As I find I cannot print the Examination in an Appendix, I give the chief
of these passages. The editions are specified in the Lists that follow.
ZECHARIAH on the top of the page containing only Haggai's prophecy. In
Blayney’s folio, and a folio Oxford Bible, 1786.
Mal. iv. 2.— Son, for Sun of Righteousness, and ye omitted in the last clause
of the verse.
Hosea vi. 5.—shewed, for hewed them by the prophets.
Luke xii. 14.—said unto me, for said unto him.
Luke xiv. 26.—Hate not his own wife for his own life.
1 Tim. v. 21.— Discharge, for I charge thee before God, &c.
1 John i. 4.—our joy for your joy.
Reeve’s 18mo. Bible, 1811.—6,500 errors in the mode of printing Lord, &c.
t+ This is also the doctrine of the ablest of our Lawyers, when they have had
to decide upon the subject. ‘‘The Chancellor, Masters, and Scholars of the
University (of Cambridge) ARE INTRUSTED (says the Court of King’s Bench,
certifying its opinion into Chancery) with a concurrent authority to print all
Acts of Parliament,’ &c. &c. [The printing of the Bible and Prayer-book, is
a branch of the same privilege.] And Mr. Justice Foster, in a letter to a friend
12
kind of implicit faith of the mere English reader in the public
translation seemed worthy of the greatest consideration:—
that perhaps men conversant with the original languages
would hardly feel the extent of this creditable confidence in
some christians: and that in behalf of such in particular, I
would entreat your Lordship’s close consideration of this
whole matter. I ventured to instance a case in which the
next verse to one that had been shockingly marred at the Cla-
rendon Press, and one of similar phraseology, had in my own
ministrations, been the means of softening the heart of a
murderer.* (‘The murderer shall be surely put together, for
the murderer shall be surely put to death:’’ was the marred
version of Numb. xxxv. 17. in the Oxford Bible of 1804.)
Suppose, I said, that very verse had been so marred in his
Bible, and made the nonsense which the next was, the har-
dened individual might have remained so.
at Oxford, Dec. 11, 1778, observes, “ The words intrusted with a concurrent
authority, were thrown in by way of an intimation to the University, that the
Court considered the power granted by the Letters Patent as a TRUST reposed
in that learned body for public benefit.”
* It was after three weeks of close attention upon him in jail: and the Bible
I used was one bought for him at a neighbouring Pawnbroker’s, a kind of place
where I have since often seen on sale the most disgracefully-printed Bibles of
the Universities ; as, for instance, the ‘To remain’ Edition of the Cambridge
Press, hereafter-mentioned. Gentlemen, I understand, constantly go round
to these and similar places in London, to buy second-hand Bibles for public
and private charities. Thus the poor, who ought especially to be protected in
this matter by the rich and learned, receive these sad mixtures with their bread
of life, long after the editions have ceased to be suld as new. Nor can I quit
this case of a murderer, without observing, that the Bible and its errors must
be regarded as matters of unique, and by all who really believe it, of entirely
unparalleled importance. A blunder in a word, or part of a word, will often
involve the gravest moral and everlasting distinctions of men and things....
often have involved such distinctions practically. The Oxford 8vo. Bible of
1801, for instance, prints the comparatively slight charge against certain pro-
fessors in primitive times —‘‘ These are murmurers,’’—*“ these are murderers.”
Bad enough characters they were, but not of this grade; or they certainly had
not been spoés, even, in primitive ‘‘ feasts of charity,’’ see Jude 10 and 12, What
word of weightier moral import, one would ask, than this of MURDERER could
be trifled with in this way ? When I have occasionally seen the quotation of
such errors received with asmile, I have thought of Prov. xxvi. 18, 19. in sorrow
13
Your Lordship finally assured me that you felt my com-
munications to be “ important ;” that you would confer with
** the Archbishop upon them,” and inform me of the result.
In about a week, I had the satisfaction of learning that
your Lordship had so conferred ; and “ I am assured” your
Lordship states, (20th April, 1831,) “ upon inquiry, that
with respect to the two Universities, MEASURES HAVE BEEN
TAKEN, within the last few years, to secure correctness in
their impressions of the Holy Scriptures.”
Your Lordship asked me for any list of errors within the
last few years.
My reply gave a few that will afterwards appear, and
pointed out as on sale in 1827 and 183], (it has since been
brought to my School by some Pupils from the North of
England, and has been found on sale in various parts of Lon-
don this year.)
‘‘ A Cambridge 12mo. New Testament without date, but
called a Stereotype Edition, printed by T. Smith, present
Printer, and bearing Mr. Mawman’s last address, which
interpolates the strange words, “ To REMAIN,” Gal. iv. 29;
“ persecuted him that was born after the Spirit to remain.’’*
—This arose, | am told, from the Printer in 1804 (pray re-
mark, my Lord, this distance of date; I have a copy dated
1805) wishing to let a comma’ “ remain,” which he had at
first marked out of the proof. I found a Cambridge Bible of
1819 with a remarkable error in Mal. iv. 2. bound up with
this New Testament this month, and bearing the name of
the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge. Two edi-
tions, of the same text, at least with the same error, were
also sent to the Bible Society some years ago.”’—(April 25,
1831.)+
* Making the whole verse to read, ‘‘ Butas then, he that was born after the
flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit to remain, even so it is
now !!’’
+ 1 bought an 8vo. Cambridge Edition of the New Testament, bound in calf,
‘¢ printed for the British and Foreign Bible Society,” without date, having
the same error partly obliterated, in June of this year, 1832.
14
My concluding paragraph was—“‘ Much cheaper Bibles
and Prayer-books, it appears, my Lord, we are to be offered.
I am anxious that we should moé sacrifice accuracy to pecu-
niary considerations more than it has been done; (rather for
less) —but the existing mode regarded as a protection to the
public from a corrupted Text will be held, I fear—to be a
failure. Let then, my Lord, a full investigation of the evil be
quietly set about ; and, if possible, by disinterested parties.
The italics are inaccurate, I have reason to expect, in hun-
dreds of places ; the Holy Name of God (like the italics) is
printed after no authorised mode or standard, eyen where our
venerable Translators have adopted a mode. America in the
meantime, is adopting our erroneous editions for her stand-
ards :* they are taken as guides, at least, for New Transla-
tions in the Easternt world, and probably in other quarters,
while at home an impression of their inaccuracy is spreading.
An investigation of the extent to which this trust has been
abused, would of itself best lead to practical remedies and
precautions for the future.”’
P.S. Clergymen have told me that the largest. Church}
Bibles are found very erroneous. One, that an important part
of a text he had taken in the Lesson of the day, to his great
astonishment, was not in the Church Bible when he came to
® See Mr. Horne’s important information on this subject, v. ii. 258, of his
Critical Introduction, second Edit. and a ridiculous error in Ezek, xlvii. 10.
{of the Editions he states to be preferred in America) in the list of typographical
errors—‘‘ The fishes,”’ for ‘* The fishers shall stand upon it” (the river of living
water).
+ Since this was written, a learned friend who has returned from Calcutta
on account of ijl health, informs me, that he had forwarded to him there a
copy of the 8vo. King’s Printer’s Bible, 1817, printed for the British and
Foreign Bible Society, which omits the word ‘‘ not,”’ in John xvii. 25. while
he was translating the Scriptures for the mission to which he twas attached, into
Tamul,
t The Church Bible still (1832) in use in the Parish Church of St. Mary’s,
Islington, is a remarkably erroncous one. A clergyman who some years ago
officiated in this Parish, assured me he was occasionally at a loss ta proceed
in reading the Jeasons from it. One passage (1 Jolin i. 4.) has, { have reason
to believe, been read erroneously in this Church four times a year for many
years.
_ 16
read the Lesson. It: was, 1 John v. ]2., my Lord, and “ of
God” (on which he had made some observations) were
the omitted words.
Receiving no reply for nearly a month, and never in fact
having had an opportunity to present to your Lordship my
principal List of Errors, I now forwarded it with the fol-
lowing Letter. [These errors, amounting to upwards of Fifty
are incorporated in the first List at the end of the Pamphlet.]
T. CURTIS TO THE LORD BISHOP OF LONDON.
‘*GROVE HOUSE, ISLINGTON.
‘* May 20, 183).
(COPY.)
** My Lorp, |
‘‘ As I am sincerely willing, and even anxious, to
leave with your Lordship any future plan which may seem demanded
for the protection of the Text of our English Bible, I take the
liberty of inclosing a List of errors in sense and doctrine which
have come’ to my knowledge. They are those which I took with
me to ‘St. James’ Square, but which your Lordship had not then
time to examine.
«‘ Permit me to add, my Lord, that on further occasional inves-
tigation of ‘the ‘subject, I find among the alterations of the last few
years (to which your Lordship has alluded) a remarkable abandon-
meént of ‘Dr. Blayney as a standard. He speaks of his corrections of
the chronology, of the marginal readings and references—the heads
of chapters and pages, &c. as among his principal labors. Now the
whole of these are expressly abandoned by Drs. Mant and D’Oyley as
(truly) “ unauthorised,” and almost the whole by several authorised
editions after them. See their preface. But then why do they re-
tain, resting on no better authority, his numerous alterations of the
Italics, or his frequent departures from the principle adopted by our
Translators in printing certain Hebrew names and titles of God?
“Your Lordship would greatly oblige me if you would conde-
scend to state what are the methods by which your Lordship under-
stands the Universities to have secured future correctness. My
apprehension is, that no specific standard is now followed. Not
the Bible of 1611, for the Italics of this, (or supplementary words
rather) are altered in almost innumerable places; not Bishop Lloyd,
or Dr. Blayney. But the Translators on some of the important
16
points mentioned; Bishop Lloyd on Chronology; (see the preface _
of Drs. Mant and D’Oyley) Dr. Blayney for the Italics, &c. 7
“‘ T could certainly wish that your Lordship would unite with me
some Clergyman or Gentleman in your Lordship’s confidence, and
that we should together furnish your Lordship with a more full and
detailed report on this matter. J am sure there ts more in it than
any man who has not devoted much time to the investigation can ima-
gine ; and would willingly give up to it three or four hours per day
of an approaching month of leisure. (Observe, my Lord, mine are
hitherto only casual collections.) :
“Qn the other hand, if it is your Lordship’s opinion that my
impressions are unwarranted, or my lists of Errors unimportant, this
I should be obliged by your Lordship’s intimating to me. The sub-
ject I cannot relinquish ; but it is my duty to forbear troubling your
Lordship, the moment I have reason to think I am doing so.”
“‘T have the honor to be,
“* My Lozp,
‘“* Your Lordship’s most obedient and
“‘ Respectful humble Servant,
«TT. CURTIS.”
To the Right Hon. and Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of London, &c. &c.
“P. S. Should your Lordship be able readily to refer to the
modern Cambridge Bibles you will find the word “likewise,” Heb.
ix. 21. inserted (as it would seem correctly in point of criticism) by
Dr. Blayney, but ot in the Bible of 1611.
Is in Cambridge 1805 and 1819, Stereotype 12mo.
Not ..scces- 1820 12mo.
{re es 1824 and 1826, 12mo and 24mo.
Not in eesecere 1829 12mo.
In secceces 1830 Diamond.
And out of all the modern Oxford Editions in verbal, and so far
correct, conformity to the Translators’ Bible.”
Your Lordship, in the end of June, enclosed me the reply
upon my papers from Cambridge, which I am forbidden to
publish.
At this period also occurred a short correspondence with
the Oxford Press; in which some portions of the public would
feel interested—but I must compress.
17
It embraced, my Lord, an inquiry through Sir Robert.
H. Inglis, after the number printed of a certain Antinomian
Oxford Testament* of the year 1807, and the channels of dis-
tribution into which it might have been sent. I received a
reply, in which Mr. Collingwood said he could not, at the
distance of time, give me “‘ any certain information on the
subject,’’ but that it was printed when “ very small impres-
sions, comparatively, of the Scriptures were taken off.”’
Now, I apprehend, a “ comparatively small” impression of
the Bible may consist of a large number; the impressions
vary, it is said, from 2,000 to 10,000. Dr. Burton lately
wrote of 30,000 being ordered at one time by the Bible
Society. Be this as it may, ¢his impression of the Bible, if
consisting of a few hundreds only, was far too large; and I
submit, my Lord, that five hundred preachers of such dan-
gerous, but in some parts of the country acceptable and
specious doctrine, might be less likely to produce serious
mischief, than five hundred Bibles delivering it broadly as
Gon’s Word, to the people. I was certainly much struck at
the time, and am still deeply impressed with the fact, that
the Antinomian heresy, characterized by the late and great
Mr. Haxras “the epidemic,’’and “ wide-spreading malady’? of
our day, “an evil of gigantic size and deadly malignity’’—should
have been thus secretly, however undesignedly, supported by
the Bibles of a highly orthodox and learned University.
It was at this period (June 20, 1831) that my private
affairs leading me in that direction, and the correspondence
already opened furnishing an opportunity, I sought to confer
at Cambridge with the Dean of Peterborough, the Regius
Professor of Divinity, on the subject of these letters.
This learned person at once and unequivocally declared, that
there could be no question it was the duty of the Universi-
ties to keep in print an ascertained and unaltered text, ¢. e. that
* I must thus characterize a New Testament (see the specimens) which,
Heb. ix. 14. reads, ‘“‘ How much more shall the blood of Christ—purge your
conscience from Goop works,” instead of dead works.
B
. 18
of King James’ Version ; and that no man or body of men had
_- any power or right to vary from this.*.... In regard to Dr.
_ Blayney’s alterations, he said, “ You will find nobody here very
~
anxious to uphold what he has done.’’ Upon the first point,
as it had been my own guiding principle throughout this busi-
ness, and was frequently adverted to, it was not probable that
I should mistake him. Iam confident [ did ot: and on the
last I give nearly his own words. When I stated the seri-
ous amount of errors already discovered, the learned Professor
stated, (and this more than once) “ Well, I see we must stop
the press.” ‘ We will directly stop the press at any rate.”’
The Dean adverted to the difficulty of doing any thing mate-
rial in the business until October—that the University was
about to separate, &c. This he strongly stated: the writer
as strongly remonstrating against the sad consequences. In
his zeal he said, “ But you must do something.” It appears
most extraordinary to admit the necessity of stopping the
University Press, one of the chief authorised sources of
God’s Word to the country, and to take no measures to
rectify what is amiss.
The next morning our conversation was renewed in the
Dean’s library; and turned chiefly on the point of what
positive course could be adopted in the acknowledged di-
lemma of the University: or how the standard was practi-
cally to be restored. I only remember one other subject
intervening. I asked if Dr. Paris’ Bible was known at Cam-
bridge: or the date of two other Cambridge Bibles, to which
Dr. Blayney has adverted, and could not find that they were.
Having just before 1 called on the: Dean had the pleasure
of a short interview with the Regius Professor of Hebrew,
and the satisfaction of a prompt offer from him: to assist in
* Dr. Turton has said, that he was at this period but ill-informed as to
the state of the text, has since seen reason to alter his opinion, &c. I can
only add, that I had seund reasons for believing him to be as well-informed at
the period of our conference, as any of his brethren; as also that this was at
the time your Lordship’s impression, I cannot see, however, that the apology
aids the case. It is of the strange ignorance of this great matter by those who
preside over it that I complain.
19 '
any way in the business which I told him was in hand, I
mentioned to the Dean in this conversation the possibility —
of setting about a revision of the Bible in this way, i.e. that
the Hebrew Professor should be invited to take particular
charge of any critical questions that might arise in the Old
Testament : that no one could be more competent than himself
to superintend in a similar manner the New; and I would be
responsible for‘an accurate collation of all the earlier edi-
tions with the modern, and for referring all doubtful matters
- for due consideration.
The Dean proposed our proceeding together to the Vice-
Chancellor’s: as we went we were to look at the Bibles of
the University that might be useful in this business. These
were in fact—a single copy of the edition (No. 2.) of 1611,
and a 4to. Bible of 1746, in the Fitzwilliam Museum. Dr.
Blayney’s was not to be found in Cambridge, as the Dean
assured me ; as also that there was no other Bible in the Col-
lege libraries worth my examination on a future day.
With the Vice-Chancellor we had an interview of above
an hour’s continuance. The Dean of Peterborough stated
the object of my visit: the inquiry proceeding in London
concerning the King’s Printer’s office, &c. I only interrupted
him when he spoke of my coming down to Cambridge, to
support the privileges of the University. 1 stated, that in
eandour, I must say I had not come down for. any such pur-
pose: at the same time, I would add, that I came down with
no view of attacking them. My sole object was—the rec-
tification of the numerous errors in the Authorised Bible, on
the Authorised Standard : that I would unite and labour with
whoever would first press to this point. And I naturally
entered upon it, first, with the authorised parties as having
this most readily and unquestionably in their power.
I stated that I conceived both Universities to have acted
seriously in error: the one venturing to alter the Authorised
Version (particularly in 1769) in numerous instances; and
the other adopting those alterations, as it ‘would appear,
without examination. ...The proposed plau of an immediate
20
revision being attempted was mentioned, when the Vice-
Chancellor asked for a written communication on the sub-
ject. I for a moment hesitated as to promising it ; on which
the Dean of Peterborough said, “ I think I may say, I know
enough of Mr. Curtis’ views to undertake to furnish the
communication.’’* |
The Vice-Chancellor more than once during the conversa-
tion came to the Dean’s conclusion, as to the necessity of
immediately stopping the press. Indeed, he asked the Dean
of Peterborough, whether he could send a message to that
effect to the printing-office, or call there on his return home.
.«-. And the general issue of the interview, was an arrange-
ment between these two important officers of the University,
that a Syndicate should be summoned for the Tuesday fol-
lowing, to consider and determine upon the business.
Mr. Smith, the Printer, happening to come to the Vice-
Chancellor’s Lodge towards the conclusion of our conference,
he was, in my presence called in, asked by the Vice-Chancel-
lor the state of the Bible department, and ordered to proceed
with no more Bible-work for the present, as a meeting was
to be held respecting it in his parlour the following week.
On our departure from the Lodge, the Dean accompanied
me through the Fitzwilliam Museum, the Public Library,
Trinity College Library, &c.; and observed on our way, that
as the proposed engagement of my time for the University
would be considerable, I ought to make some estimate of its
value: that it was out of the question for the University to
engage with me in revising the Bible without giving a proper
* IT must beg to note, that the Dean of Peterborough spontaneously and
somewhat promptly made this offer: I feel much mortified to have to add—
I could never learn that he redeemed his pledge...... That is, the Vice-
Chancellor was particular in requesting a written statement; the Dean offered
to make it on my behalf—and I have reason to believe it never was made.
Whether this put me in what is called a false position with this high authority,
the Vice-Chancellor, I have no opportunity of learning. It isa manner of
acting, however, that J cannot regard as correct on the part of the Dean of
Peterborough.
21
remuneration, &c. as “ it was the best thing they had.’ I
observed that the subject had never presented itself to my
mind in this way; but as he named it, I would give it consi-
deration. I was to dine with him in the afternoon; and
agreed then to state what might occur to me.
-We dined, andI then mentioned, (in that spirit of candour
which had hitherto pervaded our communications), that I
had reflected on the matter of being engaged to collate the
various Bibles necessary ; and had roughly thought, as Dr.
Blayney received a thousand pounds, as I understood, for
putting the Universities in the wrong, they might give me
five hundred pounds to assist in putting them right. I again,
however, observed, that this was a point I did not originally
consider at all, nor would I now have it pressed, so as in any
way to obstruct the business: a sentiment which I afterwards
thought it right to express by letter tothe Vice-Chancellor.*
Returning home, I engaged myself in locking into the
Public Libraries for the early editions of the Authorised
Version: in the midst of which I was greatly surprised by
the following communication :—
THE DEAN OF PETERBOROUGH TO THE REV. T. CURTIS.
‘* DEANERY, PETERBOROUGH,
‘* July 7, 1821,
“« My Dear Sir,
“‘I feel quite grieved that a post should have
departed, without conveying a letter of mine, which you would expect
to receive ; but I really was so completely exhausted by the heat,
and the labours I had gone through, that I was unable to write a
few lines.
“Ata meeting of the Syndics of the University Press, held yes-
terday, your letter to the Vice-Chancellor was read; and I was re-
quested to express to you their sincere thanks for the communication.
It appeared to the Syndics that the first step to be taken in
* I will print this letter, if it be hereafter needful: at present I feel it neces-
sary only to say, that it was to guard amongst comparative strangers, against
the imputation of being led into this matter as a mere ‘‘ hireling,”’ which I
was not.
22
relation to the subject, was to have an edition of the Bible as now
printed, accurately collated with an edition of 1611; and they have
accordingly ordered such a collation to be made without delay.
They conceived that a collation of the other edition of 1611, and
the edition of 1612, will also be requisite. In fact, they are resolved
that every effort shall be made to produce, as soon as possible, gn
edition which may be considered as a Standard.
“ The funds at the disposal of the Syndics are so very small, that
it would be doing you great injustice if I were to encourage you to
occupy your time in this business. But you have it, I am quite sure,
very much at heart, that correct copies of the Scriptures should be
in circulation; and any suggestions with which you may be pleased
to favor us, will always be gratefully received, and attentively con-
sidered. We are, you may rely upon it, earnestly intent upon doing
every thing that can be done, in this important undertaking; and I
intreat that you will communicate to me whatever may at any time
occur to you, as conducivé to so praiseworthy a purpose.
“ I was apprehensive when I had the pleasure of seeing you, that
it was not in our power to reward you for your labours in an under-
taking of this kind; but I did not think myself warranted in making
any statement to that effect without consulting my brethren of the
Syndicate.
“ With best wishes for your welfare, believe me,
“ My dear Srr,
“ Your's, very faithfully,
(Signed)
«TT, TURTON.”
This letter surprised me, as widely different in tone from
my personal communications with the Dean. The question
of remuneration he himself had raised: and I said, and had
written as explicitly as I could, that the business would not,
on my part, go off on any such point. True it was, that I saw
something incomprehensible in the Syndics having voted the
large sums of which I heard to rebuild the printing: office at
Cambridge, when they knew not how to set about the chief
work they had to print; and now could not afford to pro-
vide themselves with correct “copy.” In truth, I could not
23
believe that the proposed plan of revision did go off on this
point. The Syndics, however, to my no small satisfaction,
had adopted in substance my plan, i. e. collating the modern
Bibles with that of 1611, and the early editions: I had full
opportunity to observe how it should be executed; and with
so much gained for the blessed Book and the public, I re-
solved never to complain on my own account.
But I thought the facts I had collected respecting the
Authorised Version ought, in evident duty, to be directed
into some useful channel: and I accordingly prepared for
the consideration of my literary friends (but never published)
‘ Reasons for Reprinting the Holy Bible, in the Autho-
rised Version of King James I. and Proposals for the Work.”’
- While engaged on a proof of this Paper, which the reader
may obtain at my bookseller’s, Professor Lee,* of Cambridge,
did me.the honour of a call.... and asked how my represen-
tations and proposals at Cambridge had terminated? I put
into his hands the Dean of Peterborough’s letter. I shewed
him also the proof before me; when he requested to take it
home with him. I consented (not knowing that he had any
particular purpose in view) on one condition—that if he
found in it any thing at all disrespectful to the Established
Church, or that he thought unfair towards the Universities,
he would send me it back with such passages marked.
From the subsequent correspondence of the Dean of
Peterborough, I have reason to know, that the paper was
* | shall strictly adhere to the mere facts of business that connect me in
this statement with Professor Lee. I could speak of his personal kindness
and scholar-like frankness of behaviour, when kindness and frankness were
peculiarly in season: but I only advert to them here, as accounting for some
movements which he spontaneously made, and perhaps for some_of his expres-
sions in regard to my qualifications for the task, in which it was proposed we
should jointly Jabour. He only did justice to my zeal and great anxiety to see
this business in a peaceable course, under the direetion of the authorised
parties. I fear, had it proceeded as was designed, he might have been disap-
pointed in his expectations from me; but I was not at any rate dismissed by
my and. his principals, the learned Syndics, on this account; they did not wait
to see any portion or fraction of our labours.
——- ~~ —a— eww ee . -
24
laid before the Vice-Chancellor, and sent to the Dean. About
a week after, I received from Professor Lee the following
communication :—
THE REV. PROFESSOR LEE TO THE REV. T. CURTIS.
«“ CAMBRINGE, AUGUST 3, 1831.
(COPY.)
“ My Dear §1r,
“ Yesterday was the first time I had it in my power
to see the Vice-Chancellor, since I had the pleasure of seeing you at
Islington. I then made a strong representation to him on the case
of yourself and the projected new edition of the Authorised Version of
the English Bible. In consequence of this, the Vice-Chancellor de-
termined to call an extraordinary Syndicate to-day, which he has
done, and I now hasten to tell you the results, which are these :—
The Syndics have requested me to superintend the collation, which
they previously ordered, and of which I think Dr. Turton informed
you, and generally to superintend the new corrected edition, with
the assistance of Dr. Turton.... Now, my dear Sir, I have great
hopes that this arrangement will meet your approbation. My im-
pression is, that it has been made principally for that purpose....
Let me etate my intentions as the matter now stands; and if you
can suggest any thing likely to put things in a still better train,
I should be most happy in receiving a line from you to that effect.
First, this collation must necessarily be proceeded with, because I
have no authority to stop it; and secondly, because it will not be
necessary at all to retard the projected edition on that account:
besides, we cannot have too many materials to work up. In the
next place, as neither Dr. Turton nor myself can give up all our
time to this work, nor even time enough to go through all the par-
ticulars connected with it, it is my intention, and in this I think Dr.
Turton will join me, to move for power to appoint a coadjutor,
wherever we can find a person duly qualified and willing to un-
dertake such appointment. I need not say that in such case, ap-
plication will be made to you, not only because you have very
properly and very generously called the attention of the University
to this question, but also because you have been so long conversant
with it, that your services will be infinitely more valuable than those
of any other person upon whom we can lay our hands. I cannot of
course, say any thing in this state of the business, about the amount
25
of remuneration, but I think I may say that our coadjutor will not
be suffered to go unremunerated. Now, my dear Sir, I have opened
to you all my mind on this subject, and I request you to favor me
with your thoughts about it. I shall write to Dr. Turton to-morrow,
who is now at Peterborough; and, no doubt, he will be quite agree-
able to any fair and well-digested arrangement, likely to bring the
projected work to a speedy and good conclusion. It is my intention
to be at the White Horse, Fetter Lane, about four o’clock on
Monday next. By the by, the coach comes through Islington, and
is at the Peacock about half-past three. If you can make it conve-
nient to meet the coach, and come down with me to Fetter Lane,
(where I must also remain during Sunday) we can talk on the
‘matter at length: and it is not improbable I may have had a letter
from Dr. Turton before that time. If so, we shall soon be able to
commence operations. Hoping your family are all well, as mine
are,
“‘ I now subscribe myself,
« My Dear Sir,
Your's, very faithfully,
«“ SAMUEL LEE.”
(Signed)
We met accordingly in London.... I then expressed
some hesitation as to a final arrangement with the Syndics,
on the ground of the probable soreness of some parties who
had expressed their jealousy of my acquaintance with Pro-
fessor Lee; and of the high churchmanship of others, to
which I had some reason to believe every thing in Univer-
sity-management would be made to bend. The Professor .
assured me that matters were improving in this respect;
and that when the business was once arranged, we should
be able to work on very well with all the parties concerned.
I requested a copy of the Resolution of the Syndics, to
which he had alluded in his Letter, and received the fol-
lowing :—
« AUGUST 3, 1831.
“ It is agreed, that Professor Lee be requested to examine from
time to time the progress of the persons employed in collating the
Bible of 1611 with that of 1825; and generally to superintend the
26
work. And that. Professor Turton, on his return to the University;
be requested to lend his aid to promote the success of this importan
undertaking.”
The next day the Professor went down to Bristol; and |
sent after him a Letter objecting to being, as I termed it, —
‘“¢ smuggled” into this business. ‘* There can be no need for
me to add,” I said, “ that neither by this term nor in thought,
do I impute any wish to make cheap of me to yourself. I
do not know that it is to be personally imputed to any body.
But I think the Syndics should by some memorandum or
resolution include me by name; as, for instance, ‘ and that
(you may guakerise in my description, if you like)
be invited to assist in this business ;’ and (perhaps) © with
an especial view to the use of his egllected series of early
and other Bibles.’ I add this, because I can fully enable
you to testify the importance of such a series to the work ;
and to give the Syndics a just and solid reason to be placed
on record. For I find even my modern false copies of occa-
sional use, I assure you, to settle the origin and character of
some errors; and of these modern Bibles I had upwards of
fifty different editions before I began to collect the early
ones. |
“© IT know, and would with all christian wisdom and hu-
mility meet, the main feeling of repugnance—at my dis-
sent. But, my dear Sir, no man could better deal with this
than your Vice-Chancellor at the time I saw him. J do not
say that my mind is at all at present brought to consider
what I here suggest as any thing final; but I put it to yon,
as I should wish to do to him, (and will go to Cambridge to
do this, if it be on reflection adviseable)— Whether this may
not be a time and occasion to extend good-will and courtesy
between parties so brought together? That is, making no
parade of the matter, but only acting in straightforward
justice and propriety to the whole affair, and all parties con-
cerned. Think of this.
‘‘ T have had put into my hands within these two days the
27
most curious proof of the wretched practical conduct of all
parties connected with your press, to a very late date; 7. e.
a list of such errors as these in 1828, (12mo. Nonpareil.)”’ '
Deut. xii. 19.—‘‘ Take heed that thou forsake not the Levite as long as
thou livest upon thy earth,’’ for ‘‘ the earth.”
Psalm xlii. 1.—‘‘ As the heart” (oh! shame) panteth after the water brooks,”
&c. for ‘‘ the hart’’—that beautiful figure thus dio/ted from the Psalm; and
its connection with ‘‘ the tears” (you: know) of the third verse.
Eccles. v. 11.—“‘ When goods increase, thy are increased,” &c. for ‘ they.”
Matt. xxii. 28.—‘* Whose wise,’’ for ‘‘ whose wife shall she be.” Stark
nonsense, yet puzzling to the unlearned.
1 Cor. x. 31.—-‘* Do all to the glory God” —*‘ of” omitted.
Heb. xiii. 2.—** Bet* not forgetful,” for ‘‘ Be not forgetful.”
1 Pet. ii. 16.—** A cloke of malicionsness,”’ for ‘‘ maliciousness.”’
These are sent me by a minister, dated, he says, 1828;
and, (observe) I find them all in a new Bible just sent in for
my boys, dated 1829.”
A Letter stating that the Professor had requested me to
be named to assist in the projected edition of the Bible, “as
encouraged by Dr. Turton in a Letter just received,”’ and my
own inquiries as to the long delay which now took place, I
here omit. The following seemed to me to settle the busi-
ness sufficiently for us to proceed: :
THE REV. PROFESSOR LEE TO THE REV. T. CURTIS.
** LOWER COLLEGE GREEN, BRISTOL,
“ August 31, 1831.
“My Dagar Sir,
‘You are quite right; the Vice-Chancellor has been
out of College. He wrote to me a short time ago from London,
saying, that my letter had followed him thither; and that he had
been making all the enquiry he could for copies of the early editions
of the Bible, &&. * * * * * * * * *
‘‘This morning I had a letter from Cambridge on business, and I
hasten to lay before you the particulars. I told you in my last what
I had said in my letter respecting your being formally appointed a
* I heard a tradesman of this neighbourhood pausing one day over the possi-
bility of this (Bet) being the vulgar abbreviation of Elizabeth !
«28
corrector of the Press, &c. with Dr. Turton and myself. The Vice-
Chancellor’s letter says,— 1 called a special meeting at the Press,
at which the following resolution passed. Agreed, that a new
Brevier octavo edition of the Bible, with references, be immediately
commenced, in accordance with the text of the folio edition of 1611;
and that Professors Turton and Lee be authorised to employ any
person they may deem competent to assist them in ascertaining the
correct readings. It is the wish of the Syndics present that the new
edition should be an exact reprint of that of 1611, with the exception
of typographical errors.” The only comment of any importance
given on this resolution by the Vice-Chancellor, is this: “The reso-
lution to which the Syndics have come will simplify the business very
much.” ‘This, I apprehend, is said with reference to the particulars
stated in your first letter to me here; viz. that your name should be
named, &c. You also mention to me something about persons of
different creeds being brought together on this occasion. To
all of which I have no objection; I myself will sacrifice any thing
but principle for the sake of good neighbourhood: but, on the
present, which is a mere question of business, I think, with the
Vice-Chancellor, that these things need not be mentioned. You
need not be afraid, however, on this account that your name will
be kept back, either by the Syndics, or any one concerned in this
work; certainly not by me, who have great doubts whether it will
be such as to give any one much literary eclat. Such as it is,
however, you may depend upon having your share. The resolution
you now have, and you know quite as much as I do on the whole
matter. I believe Iam authorised to ask you, whether you feel dis-
posed to take a part in the proposed work or not? I can say no
more about remuneration, than that I believe the Syndics will
attend to the recommendations of Dr. Turton and myself on this
subject, when the work shall have been completed. I do not see
that we can make any recommendation now, because it is quite
impossible for us to say what labour you will have bestowed upon
it. I can only say for myself, that having had some experience in
this way, I shall be disposed to do you ample justice; and think I
may say, Dr. Turton will do thesame. JBesides, there will certainly
be no objection to your having your labour valued by any friend
of your own, who is acquainted with this sort of labour. I am sure
no objection will be made by me. Now, taking matters as they
29
stand, placed I think in a fair way for consummation, and just as
you have said you wished to see them, giving you every opportunity
to exert your abilities to make this edition as perfect as possible, I
ask, are you willing to engage to read the proofs once at least, and
recommend such readings, (I mean such as will effectually correct
the errors of the edition of 1611) as will render the edition perfect
in your estimation? Dr. Turton and myself will of course also read
them more than once, collating them with such copies of the early
editions as are accessible to us. “For my own part, I do not despair
of having access to the first five or six at least; I have two here,
1611 and 1613; and have been promised access to several others.
I should be obliged to you for an answer as early as convenient, as
I must take steps in accordance with your determination.
“TI remain,
« My Dear Sir,
“ Your’s, faithfully,
“ SAMUEL LEE.”
«<P, S.—I very much doubt whether I shall see London before
February next. I cannot, therefore, promise you an interview as I
hoped I could at your house.”
(Signed)
The reader must be troubled with my reply to the Pro-
fessor, and his final rejoinder.
T. CURTIS TO THE REV. PROFESSOR LEE.
‘“‘ GROVE HOUSE, ISLINGTON,
Sept. 2, 1831.
‘“ My Dear SIR,
“T hope, amongst other surplusage matter, this pro-
longed talking about me, will soon be thrown aside in this business.
Therefore, I at once answer in the affirmative your inquiry, and
will read the proofs of the new octavo edition of the Bible proposed
by the University, at least once; recommending such readings as will,
in my estimation, render the edition perfect.
It is but just to yourself and myself to add, that I do this greatly,
nay, chiefly in reliance on your personal straightforwardness and
knowledge of all I think of this matter, and particularly because I
am to have every fair “ opportunity to exert myself” in making this
edition as perfect as possible."}Nor will I doubt, while I retain my own
30
particular feelings, of the manner in which the appointment might
have been made, that every degree of justice will be done in the
issue to my character and interests in the way you propose.
“Therefore, dear Sir, to business. I cannot be satisfied without
reading over each proof by all my principal editions between 1611
and 1618. I will describe them to you more particularly another
day, but they now embrace two very distinct folio, black editions of
1611; the first roman quarto (the only copy I ean distinctly hear of)
1612; first separate New Testament, black, same year; first black
quarto Bible, 1613; second roman quarto edition, 1615; first roman
folio, 1616, {at least I take it to be the first in roman;) and a black
folio, page for page with the 1611 editions, of 1617. This last has
been very useful in the collation I haye begun. Then to-day have I
sent me a beautiful octavo edition of 1615 of the late King’s.
“ That is, I must I fear have six readings of the whole matter,
to do justice to the occasional varieties that I find; and I have
already gone through one-fortieth (perhaps near one-thirtieth) of the
entire task. I have the power of consulting, on difficult and deli-
cate points, about six more various editions within this period,
namely, to the Synod of Dort; when Dr. Ward and the other
British divines formally reported on the finished labours of the
Translators.. Such a range must take us through all the possible
light on typographical errors: at the same time, as it appears to me,
much is worth doing of /abour in such a task (especially watched
and looked for as this will be) to see that there is nothing critically
todo. I have made a scale of “ varieties in the earliest editions of
the Authorised Version,” a copy of which I will forward you early,
but can now only add, that I am,
‘* Your’s, Dear Sir,
“ Most faithfully,
“TT, CURTIS.”
(Signed)
(Rejotnder.)
THE REV. PROFESSOR LEE TO THE REV. T. CURTIS.
““ BANWELL, SOMERSETSHIRE,
« Sept. 6, 1831.
“My Dear Sir,
“ Your last letter has set all right, and I am now
fiving in hopes of most cordially co-operating with you, and of
31
seeing at no distant day an edition of our English Bible which will
do us credit, and perfectly satisfy the public. I shall write by this
day’s post to Mr. Smith, our Printer, requesting him to send the
sheets, as they are printed, first to you for your corrections, &c. I
shall tell him to let them have a good broad margin, and to print
them upon paper which will bear the ink well. I wish you would
put your corrections in the margins of these sheets, either in red
ink, with your name, or in such way that they may be known to be
yours, naming at the same time your authorities, 7. e. the date of
the editions, &c. which you have consulted. When you have done
this, be so good as to send them here to me by post. I will read
them with my copies; when I have done this, I will send such
sheets to Dr. Turton for his collation, &c. and he will send them
to the press. After this, I shall recommend that the sheets come
again to you, then to me, and then, as before, go to Dr. Turton,
and that he send them to the press to be printed off. We shall of
course each give our imprimatur: and if Dr. Turton should see any
necessity for departing from our second revision, then, I shall
propose, that he send the sheets again to 'you and to me, with his
reasons stated m the margin; and that upon our returning it, as
before, he send*it to the press. The University will, of course,
defray all expense of postage. These sheets will, of course, be laid
up, and.at the close of the work, your labour of collation, &c. will
be attested by them. But they will answer other ends; .it will
always be seen by the Syndics, on what ground our text has been
formed ; and further if any question should hereafter arise as to any
of the readings, how we have determined the case in our edition.
“ If you can suggest any improvement in the course to be pur-
sued I shall be much obliged to you if you will state it. I shall
write by the next post to Dr. Turton, and get his mind on the -sub-
ject; and will apprise you if he has any thing to propose. In the
mean time, it is probable Mr. Smith may send you a sheet; for I
believe the edition is ordered: in that case it would, perhaps, be as
well to proceed with it as mentioned above, in order to avoid delay:
before the next comes, we shall, no doubt, have matured our plans.
We commence residence here next week, and propose remaining
here till the middle of November. We must then go into residence
at Bristol. But I will then apprise you of our next movements,
32
which will be to Cambridge. With kind remembrances to your
fdinily.”
«IT remain,
“My Dear Siz,
“ Your's, very truly,
“ SAMUEL LEE.”
My Lord, I now certainly felt myself impelled by the
strongest claims of duty; and must, on deliberate reflection,
consider myself justified—in diligently examining every pub-
lic and private collection of Bibles to which I could gain ac-
cess: in purchasing those which I could obtain at reasonable
prices, and which promised materially to save my time in
the collation proposed; as well as in procuring extra assist-
. ance in my ordinary pursuits, to leave my time and mind as
much as possible free, for the weighty care of this revision.
The books described in my last Letter to Professor Lee
were brought immediately into use: and I so far varied from
my first design, when I did not receive the proofs, as he anti-
cipated, in a few days, as to read and record the issue. The
object was, to be if possible before the printer all the way, and
have my six-fold readings ready to apply to one or two careful
revisions of the proofs. I could occasionally and by turns
employ one or two intelligent pupils, my son of sixteen,and
a classical assistant of my school; so that altogether I
arranged to have the six earlier editions read over to me in
portions of fifteen and twenty chapters at atime, by three
regular readers. And giving from two to three hours to the
business in the morning from an early hour; and from two
to three in the evening, we had read over and examined word
for word (including marginal readings and references) the
following editions to the twenty-fifth chapter of Jeremiah,
between the beginning of September and November 22, 1831.
(Signed)
That is to say :—
2 Editions, black, folio Of ......ccccceee 1611
1] Roman 4to. .. eocce- ovevesecnsecegseces 1612
1 Black, 4t0..ccccccecce wcecece ccccsence 1613
1 Roman 8vo...ecoee Cer ccowerersvecccses 1615
1 Roman folio .... ccscccscccrecs wetersce 1616
-
awe
6
33
When afterwards, we read the first separate New Testament,
small 4to. 16] 2, in addition, we were obliged to call in andther
reader. The modern Bible compared with them was an inter -
leaved Oxford folio of 1786, printed page for page with Dr.
. Blayney’s folio edition of 1769. On Wednesdays and Satur-
days I took down a portion of the interleaved folio to com-
pare with a third folio edition of 1611, small black letter, in the
British Museum, and there marked by Dr. Combe, “ Ist
edition.” This was consulted in every case in which the
modern differed from the early editions: as were in every
such case, the following editions in my own possession.
. 1 Roman 4to. ccwceecccescvcccvcccessces 1613
1 e®@eceeeseseoensenes 8806 eeeeoeeonvede eeee 1615
i Black, folio ...... eeecves caccecccceroce 1617
1 Roman 4to. .... cece ccs Beecee soces 1619
1 Small folio Roman ........... eocccwees 1629
1 Black, ACO. oseee eocncccccccccccosceces 164]
1 Roman 80. ccccccrsecccvscccvcvess ese 1661
The collation being thus extended, in all matters of dis-
crepancy between the modern and early Bibles, over the first
fifty years from the date of the translation. I had also the
folio edition of Dr. Blayney, 1769, by my side throughout
this collation ; and before any errors were recorded in my
interleaved folio copy of his edition, that of 1769 itself was
consulted.
On the 22nd of November, these preparatory labours
(essential, as I thought, to the correct marking of a single
series of proofs) were terminated on the part of the Univer-
sity of Cambridge, by the following Letter:—
THE DEAN OF PETERBOROUGH TO THE REV. T. CURTIS.
(COPY.)
“ CAMBRIDGE, Nov. 21, 183].
“My Dear Sir, .
‘‘ When you were in Cambridge about the end of
June, it appeared to me, as I then told you, quite impossible that
your plan for revising the text of the English Bibles could receive
due attention till after Michaelmas, when the business of the Uni-
versity would be resumed. With regard to the order of the Syndics,
communicated to you by Professor Lee, and bearing date the 29th
August, 1831, if I rightly recollect, I have already stated to you,
D
34
that it would necessatily have to be re-considered.... . After mature
deliberation, it has been finally decided by the Syndics, that the
said order shall no longer remain in force; and I have been com-
missioned to request your acceptance of one hundred pounds, on
account of the trouble which you may have taken, in consequence of
that order. In the course of a week, the Vice-Chancellor (the Rev.
Dr. Graham, the Master of Christ’s College) will transmit you
the money.
** I cannot conclude without assuring you, that the proposed plan
received the most full and fair consideration. Great pains have
been taken in this matter for many years; and although it did not
seem expedient that your plan should be persevered in, you may
rely upon it, that no effort will be wanting on the part of the
Syndics, to secure a supply of Bibles as accurate as possible. With
best wishes,
‘‘ T remain,
“ Dear Sir,
“ Your's, very truly,
“TT. TURTON.”
(Signed, )
The renewed unwillingness of the University to go back
to the Authorised Version, and the mere common-place of
‘* great pains having been taken in this matter for many
years,’ (the very phrase of your Lordship’s friend at Mid-
summer, 1831, when he could only say, that the University
would correctly follow the right standard, “if they did but
know it”), these were the chief matters, my Lord, in this
letter, that struck me with renewed surprise and disappoint-
ment. I believe I afterwards convinced the Dean that he was
mistaken as to having “already stated to” me “that the
resolution of the Syndics forwarded to Professor Lee would
necessarily be re-considered.”’
At first, I demurred upon the point of taking the money
profiered.... But I had spent some money (the greatest
part of the amount*) and much time in the service of the
* I find that the University of Oxford, according to Dr. Burton, have expended
“several hundred pounds” in the collation they have found necessary this
35
Syndics; they were under an engagement to me, which
contemplated the revision of the entire Bible; they termi-
nated the engagement, which they “ authorised” Professor
Lee to make; and they fixed upon this sum. Although
therefore it did not recompense me in the manner in which
I had been accustomed to have my labours remunerated, I
received and acknowledged it in the terms of the Dean of
Peterborough’s Letter.
_ And here, my Lord, little doubting that in the length of
this Letter I shall have tired the patience of your Lordship,
and that of some of my readers,
I subscribe myself,
Very respectfully,
Your Lordship’s most obedient Servant,
T. CURTIS.
The Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of London, &c. &c.
LETTER II.
* Let it not be forgotten, (and I recommend the fact to the especial attention of those among
ourselves who are disposed to rest contented with an implicit faith and passive acquiescence)
that the Church of Superstition never ceased to avow the profoundest reverence for the
Scriptures themselves, and what it forbids its vassals to ascertain, it not only permits but
commands them to take for granted."—Mr. Coleridge’s Statesman’s Manual.
My Lorp,
Waite the foregoing arrangement with the
University of Cambridge was pending, being assured by
Sir H. Inglis, and in other quarters, that I should readily
summer. In point of fact I procured a more useful collection of editions for
my purpose than either of the Universities possessed last year, as I came
personally to know.
36
meet with attention, I endeavoured to introduce the subject
of these Letters to a learned Oxford Delegate. I must con-
fine myself to extracts. -
T. CURTIS TO THE REV. DR. BURTON, REGIUS PROFESSOR OF
DIVINITY, OXFORD.
‘‘ ISLINGTON, AUGUST 4, 1831.
‘ Rev. Sir,
“ You will have heard of a Committee of the House
of Commons being engaged in investigating the duties of the King’s
Printer, and some of the privileges of the Universities.
* * * * * * * * *
‘“‘I apprehend no considerate men will long differ as to the exact
duty of the Universities, as privileged printers of the Bible. It was
surely to supply the public with a settled and accredited tert—Tuk
AUTHORISED VeErsi0n. Not to alter or even amend the text: not to
be or play the critic upon it. To this principle, it has appeared to
me, every iota of their moral and legal rights is to be traced. Now,
in the phrase of this blessed book, Sir, I must not be thought your
enemy because I tell you the truth. The Universities have strangely
lost sight of this principle. I wish not only to give you, (in prefer-
ence to going at once to the public) the proof of this; but I wish as
I have had the happiness to convince your Sister University, that
you yourselves should remedy the evil, if possible, before the public
knows of it what I know. Of course this is a matter of much detail.
* * * * * Wanting this opportunity [of personal conference] I have at
last determined to say and suggest in this way— Why, during the 200
years’ enjoyment of this privilege, is there no trace of a simple col-
lation of the earliest editions of our Authorised Version? J mean, for
merely typographical correctness. I find alterations by this Univer-
sity and that—additions by this (unquestionably learned) prelate and
that—unauthorised marginal readings for instance, innumerable de-
partures (almost) with regard to supplemental words from the Bible of
King James :—but I have looked in vain for any record of pains to
be the simple preservers of the Authorised Version; and of course I
have looked in vain for any authority to depart from it, in this way.
Perhaps I have thus tested sufficiently the probability of my doing
any good, by adding more. You will find some slight communica-
tions of mine with Mr. Collingwood, as to typographical errors.”
37
The reply of the learned Professor was somewhat cordial :
he hoped I would not think any apology necessary for ad-
dressing him upon a subject of such importance as that of
the printing of Bibles. He said there were no meetings of
the press in the vacations, and that the Delegates would not
re-assemble till October. He added, “ you will perhaps,
therefore, suspend any farther communications till that time;
but if you wish to write sooner, I shall be most happy to
hear from you.”
My next communication was received differently :—
T. CURTIS TO THE REV. DR. BURTON.
(COPY.)
‘‘ GROVE HOUSE, ISLINGTON,
“ August 17, 1831.
“Rev. Sir,
“My list of errors I have of late divided into what
may be called typographical, and advised; and though my attention
was first caught by the former, it is on the latter that I rest my chief
present objections to the system of the University Presses. There-
fore, Rev. Sir, are we agreed (generally) on the principle I ventured
to affirm in my last, that the Universities are to be regarded simply, as
the depositaries of the Authorised Version of King James? All hope
of the recovery of a Standard seems to me to press on this point.
“For can you be fairly said to have a Standard (certainly you
have not an authorised one) at Oxford? You, in the main follow
Blayney: but I have mentioned above a score departures from him
on some points rather material to Collingwood; I should think you
must find the necessity of departing from him increase,* and so far as
you adhere to him and depart from the Translators’ own editions, I
submit, that it is a very questionable course of procedure; both as to
the principles of criticism, as well as those of good faith with the
public, involved.
“Drs. Mant and D’Oyly support this view of the matter expressly
® Mr. Horne mentions, “‘ not fewer than 116 errors’’ discovered in Blayney,
by the London readers of the edition of 1806, 4to. But he does not say by
what standard they decided. He speaks also of their detecting 1200 errors in
the common Oxford editions; and ‘‘a great number of very gross errors” in
the Cambridge copy !
38
when they abandon, in their Family Bible, all beside the Translators’
own references and marginal readings, as unauthorised. See their
Preface. But then, 1. Why do the Universities continue these,
together with Dr. Blayney’s frequent blunders as to the mode of
printing the Lorp, Lord, Lorn God, and Lord Gop of our excellent
Translators? and 2. His almost innumerable alterations of Italic to
Roman, and Roman to Italic words? There are also some few
inserted words.
“T suggest an abandonment of the whole, and a careful return to
what ought never to have been left, the Standard of the Translators’
Bible.
‘‘ This, in all the editions of the first six years, I have been for
some time collating. Much be-praised, it has been sadly neglected:
a little care applied at intervals was all that was requisite to have
avoided some strange blunders that have crept in: but leaving this
‘‘undone,” now a new marginal reading, now new references, now
a system and then a correction of the system of chronology, has been
made or added; and in the middle of the last century the alterations
ad libitum of Dr. Blayney and his coadjutors—until, as I contend, the
Authorised Version has been, in a sense Jost to the public, and some
of its peculiarities entirely overlooked.
“I see an improvement of late, at Oxford, as to gross typogra-
phical mistakes. But woful these have been, within the last twenty
years, and J can have little confidence in your present plans that they
will not recur. I extract these within twenty years from Oxford
books all but one, before me. [They are incorporated with my first
List. ]
Add, 24mo. 1830.—Josh. fii. 11. ‘‘ The Loro of all the earth,” (the autho-
rised mode of designating Jehovah) for ‘‘ the Lord.”
Same error in 12mo. 1823, and 8vo. 1824, (minion letter.)
See also Zech. iv. 14. and vi. 5. same blunder.
Also Ps. cx. 5. which quite alters the sense.
“On the question of italics, marginal readings, &c. an inspec-
tion of the Translators’ and any modern Bible will establish the
systematic departure. I doubt if on some points Dr. Blayney under-
stood the principle of our Translators.
“I would apologize for the freedom of my remarks and exposures ;
but Aere I think it is demanded of any man who can also lay claim,
as I do, to hearty goodwill to all who love and would duly honour
the blessed Book in question.” .
39 .
(Reply.)
DR. BURTON TO THE REV. T. CURTIS.
(COPY.)
“ SHREWSBURY, Aug. 19, 1831.
“* Sir,
“Tam sure from the tone of your letter that you
will not be displeased at my speaking openly, and must tell you
fairly that I am quite at a loss to understand your principles of cri-
ticism. I was afraid from your firet letter that our Printers were
still extremely inaccurate, and that you had discovered several
errors in the last editions. I accordingly requested you to send me
a list of these errors, and I am much obliged to you for the trouble
you have taken; but my satisfaction is as great as my surprise,
when I find that every one of these errors has been corrected in
later editions. I have verified all the places with an edition of 1827,
and the mistake has invariably been corrected.
*‘ In one place you say, after shewing that an error was continued
for forty-five years, “‘ known or unknown, what does it say for the
system?” I should have thought that there could have been no
doubt as to the system: it is plain that our Printers were less accu-
rate some years ago than they are now; but your list of errata is
the strongest testimony to the accuracy of our present Printers
which could possibly have been given. You said in your former
letter that there was no evidence of reference having been made to
the original edition of 1611. How then do you account for all these
errors having been corrected? The fact is, that Mr. Collingwood
has introduced a system of accuracy which is perhaps not to be
found in any other Press; HE CONSTANTLY REFERS TO THE ORIGINAL
EDITION,* a copy of which is lodged in the Press, and your own letter
is a convincing proof that he MaKEs 4 Goop usz oF IT. Still I do not
mean to say that our-present Bibles are free from error; and as soon
as ever I return to Oxford, I shall investigate the subject. You can
perhaps point out some mistakes in the latest edition, and we shall
be much obliged to you for acquainting us with them.”
<‘ T remain,
“« Sir,
« Your’s, faithfully,
«G. BURTON.”
nn naa eee
® Between which and the modern ones, it is to be observed, are full 10,000
critical differences. It is clear that at this period Dr. Burton did ant suspect
this.
(Signed, )
40
I saw little in this triumph of Dr. Burton’s, but a strange
misconception of my meaning, and of the strengest facts of
the case ; which I endeavoured to re-state to him.
T. CURTIS TO THE REV. DR. BURTON.
(COPY.)
** GROVE HOUSE, ISLINGTON,
August 21, 1831,
“ Rev. Sir,
“IT have no “ satisfaction,” I assure you, in finding
either you or the Universities in the wrong; but your’s is a little
premature, on the subject of your typographical correctness. Observe,
however, this is not my main point; I have spoken in both my
Letters, for I have no case to make out, of your improvement in this
respect of late : my main point is, your advised and systematic depar-
tures from the Authorised Version. Upon this, probably from your
distance from Oxford, and the weighty consequences involved, I
observe you say nothing,
“‘ Yet see, Rev. Sir, the curious dilemma our brief correspondence
has already brought us to. You say all the errors specified in my
last are corrected “ in an edition of 1827.” Now I have before me
your “‘ Ruby” 8vo. 1828, and here are four of the most material
ones—am I to say again inserted? I find also all the same errors in
what is called your ‘“‘ Ruby” 24mo. 1830. And, by the way, I
referred you, I see, to Tu1s edition, as containing them. How, good
Sir, could your Printers, except most rarely gifted indeed, correct in
1827, the errors of 1880? They occur in Josh. iii. 11.; Zech. iv. 14. ;
and vi. 5.; and Psalm cx. 5.; and are errors (as, without fear, I
submit to my betters) whether compared with our excellent and real
Authorised Version, or the original Scriptures.
“‘ Of Mr. Collingwood I have heard in various quarters as a most
respectable and pains-taking Printer: but my chief objections to
your existing system, I will be free to say, are beyond his province :
or why are a body of learned Delegates in charge of the Press,
above him? You have given him inadequate materials to work with;
‘in the critical sense, JSalse copy: and lodging with him a single copy
of what you term ‘the original edition of 1611,’ will not accomplish,
as you will find, the recovery (practically) of an Authorised Standard.
“I could add much more on this topic; but am, as a Minister of
this peaceful Word, unwilling to offend, where I may not convince.
—«—sT
41
May I intreat you to look fully into the question of, How many
unauthorised doctrinal comments of Dr. Blayney and others remain
at the head of your present pages only? How many notes, involy-
ing difficult and much controverted questions of chronology and
theology at large, in the margins? Together with how many alter-
ations have been made from roman into italic words, in evident
departure from the principles, or neglect of the ancient Versions,
on which our noble Translators decided? These are not questions,
you will see, for the mechanical Printer.”
Dr. Burton replied as follows :—([I afterwards sought to
remove the little tartness of personal feeling that seemed to
have arisen between us] and here these communications with
Oxford closed.
DR. BURTON TO THE REV. T. CURTIS.
(COPY.)
« SHREWSBURY, Ang. 24, 1831.
‘« Sr,
“IT am perfectly aware of what you mean by “ the
curious dilemma” in which my last letter has placed us; and I lose
no time in rescuing you from the suspicion of having made a mis-
statement. The fault is entirely mine. Your second letter contained
twenty-six cases of errors in our Oxford Bibles. I say twenty-six
cases; because the last instance which you give, though including
four texts, refers in fact to the same case, #. e. the mode of printing the
word Lord. I verified twenty-five of the cases with an edition of
1827, and found that every one of them had been corrected: you are
quite right in saying that the last case had not been corrected in any
of the four texts, but having no Hebrew Bible at hand,* I could not tell
whether our modern editions are right or wrong. I ought of course
to have stated this, though I hardly expected you would have noticed
my emission in the way you have done; and you might have
spared your sarcastic question as to Printers correcting in 1827 the
errors of 1830. I again repeat, that I shall feel really obliged to
you for a list of “ advised and systematic departures from the Autho-
* It requires no Hebrew Bible to detect the error of printing Jehovah or
Lorp in construction, if the typographical rule of our Translators in printing
it be known.
42
rised Version.” But after what I have seen of your list of typo-
graphical errors, you must really excuse my believing the University
Guitsy* without further evidence... I shall be most happy to see
you in Oxford when I return there in October; and if you were
more acquainted with the details of our Press, you would perhaps
see that the tone which you have adopted in your letter is by no
means necessary.”
“IT remain,
‘« Srr,
‘* Your obedient Servant,
“G. BURTON.”
(Signed, )
While I was expecting the Cambridge proofs, I thought
a visit to Oxford might increase my acquaintance with the
early state of the Authorised Version, and further perhaps
excite the attention of the Delegates to the state of their
Bibles. I arrived there on Saturday afternoon, October 15,
and called on the Printer, Mr. Collingwood, and Mr. Parker,
the Bookseller ; whom I understood to have a pecuniary inte-
rest in the printing of the Bibles and Prayer-books. They very
readily engaged to send to my inn for inspection the copy of
the Bible of 161], alluded to by Dr. Burton as deposited at
the Clarendon Press. J found it to answer to my edition,
No.2.; as indeed (to anticipate the researches of the following
week) did all the five other copies of the Bible of 161] at
Oxford.t
Dr. Burton not being in College, I addressed to him a note
stating that I should be only able to remain at Oxford during
* | beg the reader’s particular attention to this feeling of the learned Pro-
feasor's, before he knew of the numerous intentional departures which are now
indisputable.
+ Aclerical friend has since pointed out a small distinction in the New
Testament of some of these.—I found at the Bodleian on Monday, a folio Bible
of 1602, originally Selden’s ; with many MS. suggestions, as they are thought
-to be, of one of King James’s Translators. In a rigid collation, for the sake
of perfectly returning to the Standard, I saw reason to suppose this book would
be useful.
43
Monday ; but if he were not coming to the University, and
_ it would be agreeable to him to receive me, I would call on
him at his house at Ewelme, on my return home. This he
politely invited me to do. The interview was of little imme-
diate moment to my business ; I took down with me however
the interleaved folio Bible in which I had entered the fruits
of my collation so far as it had proceeded. The Professor
looked at a few passages with me ; appeared to admit, at one
time, the necessity of returning to the Authorised Standard ;
yet to argue for making the italics uniform as to principle,
(as I understood him) by modern hands. He was much
surprised by my mentioning the engagement in which I
stood with the Cambridge Press; thought it was rather a
‘* hasty” undertaking on the part of the Syndics; promised
to state to me the measures that might be determined upon
at Oxford, and spoke of the necessity of both Universities
adopting some one plan of procedure in the case.
Mr. Parker having mentioned to me at Oxford, that it was
there known I had been engaged by the Cambridge Syndics, I
felt it might have been thought a want of candour, not to
allude to the circumstance in my intercourse with Dr. Burton.
I have since thought, that, in the manner of some insigni-
ficant chemical agents, when in action, my introduction
between the learned bodies of Cambridge and Oxford, has
developed affinities before unsuspected. It is quite clear that
their confidence in each other upon this subject did not exist
in June 183], as in January 1832. I could, I think, prove
that one of its first-fruits was the Cambridge breach of en-
gagement with me; and I conjecture that I brought the
happy crisis of union on, by my ‘untoward’ but unrepented
visit to Ewelme.
Having finished in December, I addressed to his Grace the
Archbishop of Canterbury, the following Letter; which if
somewhat recapitulatory, will evince, I trust, to your Lord-
ship, that I was anxious fully to acknowledge the station and
influence of the Established Church in the country.
! 44
T. CURTIS TO HIS GRACE THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY.
(COPY.)
‘* GROVE HOUSE, ISLINGTON,
“ Dec. 9, 1831.
‘‘ May 17 PLEASE YOUR GRACE,
«In such terms as you may consider most respectful,
I would humbly apply for an opportunity of submitting personally
to your Grace, the result of six months great labour of my own and
Assistants, in a collation of English Bibles.
‘To the Lord Bishop of London, I intimated in the Spring my
apprehension, that the Universities were printing the Bible without
any ‘‘specific Standard:” the result was, that his Lordship enclosed
to me a communication from Cambridge, confirming all my fears
as to the Press of that University, and expressly enquiring for a
“‘ Standard to be followed.”
“T attach great weight to that communication...,..The Univer-
sity of Cambridge has been so long printing the Bible from imperfect
and mutilated copies, that divines and scholars of the greatest emi-
nence in the University did not know what was the Standard to be
followed in June last. The Bishop of London will, I have no doubt,
verify to your Lordship this important fact. Some concluding words
of that communication are very strong:—‘‘ Can your Lordship fur-
nish us with any intelligence respecting a Standard?” I returned, at
his desire, the original communication to the Bishop.
“‘Moreover, my Lord, at this period—(for I earnestly wish the
church to know, and, if she will to remedy the whole of this mischief)
there was great jealousy between the two Universities on the point
of agreeing to a Standard. For proof of this, I refer in part to the
communication I have adverted to, and to the fact that while at
Oxford they professed to follow Dr. Blayney’s Bible (with some
slight exceptions) “‘even to a comma;” at Cambridge they did not
possess a copy of this professed Oxford Standard.
“On the last point, I am happy to hear this week from Dr.
Burton, that the Universities are in so different a disposition, that
they are ‘‘ quite agreed as to the plan that ought to be followed in
their editions of the Bible:”—but the learned Professor adds, ‘‘ con-
siderable time must elapse before they can ascertain what alterations
tt will be necessary to make.
“I wish your Grace therefore to be acquainted with the existing
state of this important business;—-with which I did not meddle, I
45
add in justice to myself, until I found that I possessed a greater
number of the earliest editions of the Authorised Version than either
University. It seems proper also to say, that I projected at Cam-
bridge a plan of collating these editions, which was so far enter-
tained that I read them for the University to the middle of “ Jere-
miah:” when I suddenly received an intimation, that the Resolution
of the Syndics in August was ‘no longer in force.’ To this was
attached an offer of money, which I have accepted (for it does not
overpay me)—on their own estimate of my labour.
«But, my Lord Archbishop, (though this turn, may be attempted
to be given to the matter) I did not labour for the money; I love
the Bible beyond my life; for I owe to it, what no Church, nor Uni-
versity can give or take from me:—and I must take the liberty of
expressing to your Grace my great jealousy of any “alterations” of
the Bible that under the circumstances, the Universities may “ take
considerable time” to make.
“In any event, I entreat your Grace’s personal attention to the
result of six months labour of an industrious literary man and .
minister of the gospel on this Holy Book. It is a mere record of
facts; but of facts of pregnant and pressing consequences, (as I think
all impartial persons must conclude) to the British Church of God
in the widest sense. And I have great apprehension, that if prompt
measures are not taken, men of very different feelings toward the
Church of England to myself (though a Dissenter) will be found to
take up this business.
~ “lam, —
“« My Lorp,
' © Your Grace’s most respectful, and
‘* Most obedient humble Servant,
(Signed,)
“TT. CURTIS.”
P.S. A schoolmaster, and wanting my vacation, I should be obliged
if your Grace could see me before the end of next week. Upon the
subject of the King’s Printers’ Bibles I have also some communica-
tions which I wish to make.”
To His Grace the Lord Archbishop af Canterbury, &o. &. &c.
The Archbishop received me at the close of my vacation,
January 26th of this year.
46
Passing some minor matters—as, the offer through Dr.
Burton of a duplicate of my collation, as it proceeded, to the
University of Oxford, of which no notice whatever was taken
—I have to acknowledge the reception, in the interim, of
a further communication from this gentleman as to the
instructions given to Dr. Blayney in 1769.
Dr. Burton says— The instructions to which Dr. Blayney
alludes, were merely a resolution at a meeting of the Delegates
of the Press, that he should compare the edition of 16]],
Bishop Lloyd’s of 1701-3, and the Cambridge editions of 1743
and 1760.* Nothing beyond this appears in the minutes of the
meetings of the Delegates. As to the “ list” (of his altera-
tions} I can find no trace of it; if it was given in to the Vice-
Chancellor, it does not appear to have been preserved ; and
since you have read the letter which is printed in the Gentle-
man’s Magazine, you have in fact all the information which
we are able to give you. Dr. Blayney was aided throughout
by acommittee of Delegates.”
{n my interview with the Archbishop of Canterbury, his
Grace observed that, strictly speaking, there was nothing in
his power to do in this business; and that he would have said
this by note, but thought I should be more satisfied to see
him. I said it was a great satisfaction to me to see his Grace:
that the chiéf-matter I had to represent was this—the Uni-
versities had’ made a great number of advised alterations in
the sacred text. Could it be reconciled with their exact duty?
His Grace observed, ‘that’ he had understood me to have
pointed out typographical errors only; that the List I had
sent to him consisted principally of such.
I answered, that my attention had been at first directed to
typographical errors; and that I sent to his Grace and the
Bishop of London, some of the principal errors of this de-
scription which I had found. But m following up the general
enquiry I had arrived at so serious a number of advised alter-
* Dod’s, the most correct Cambridge Bible, bears date 1762.—See His Royal
Highness the Duke of Sussex’s Catalogue.
47
ations, that my attention had been long engaged by them. [I
had stated this explicitly, as I conceived, in my second note.]
I would respectfully ask of his Grace, whether there was
any legal or ecclesiastical gronnd for calling any other the
Authorised Version than the Bible of King James? He said,
Certainly there was not.
I observed that the alterations of the Authorised Version
had then been most extensive, that they amounted on the
whole to several thousands,* wholly excluding the typogra-
phical errata.
His Grace enquired, whether the greater part might not
be improvements? I replied that I did not feel competent
to answer this question, in the face of the two Universities ;
that in my humble judgment many of the alterations were
not improvements. But that this was not at all my point.
That I must avow considerable jealousy of any advised
alterations of the Authorised Version even with the view to
improve it. That it was altering a public document by private
hands, which I felt to be most objectionable: and intreated
his Grace to consider where it might lead.
I afterwards turned to a few instances of alterations, as I
conceived, in error. On my pointing out some which appeared
to affect important controversies, (as in the mode of printing
the Divine names) his Grace said, But no one was capable of
interfering in such controversies, who could not have recourse
to the original Scriptures. I said, certainly; yet if our Trans-
lators had happily adopted a mode of reflecting the distinc-
tions of the original, so that a mere English reader could be
made to perceive them, no one seemed authorised to diminish
his advantages, or to lower the standard of excellence in this
respect..... I ventured to ask his Lordship, whether he did
not regard the school to which Dr. Blayney belonged as not
the most desirable, considering what the University of Oxford
entrusted to him? He said, It was not. ‘ He was a disciple
of Bishop Lowth, with not half his abilities.”
* I handed to his Grace the numerical statement at the back of my title-page.
48
I could only finally say, that his Grace would greatly
relieve my mind, if at his convenience he should be able to
state, that the Universities had. resolved to return to the
Authorised Standard. He said he had not heard of any
thing new of late being done or resolved upon by them.
I should not close, perhaps, my narrative of communica-
tions with the heads of the Church, without acknowledging
a kind reception of my statements by the Bishop of Chester;
who, exhorted me to patience; and said there were some
minds in which weighty matters must be left for a time ‘ to
thaw.” I have no right to state what kind of judgment (if
any) he formed as to my views or proceedings—but he asked
if I had found three men who could doubt that we ought
to return to the Authorised Standard? _
The King’s Printers, as your Lordship must be aware, hold
an office directly devolving upon them some of the most
serious duties of the head of the Church of England; and of
the highest consequence to the uniyersal church of God—
one that confers a patent right of furnishing us with correct
copies of the English Bible. The practice of their office has
generally been, I find, to follow in the wake of the Univer-
sities. No particular competence to their task of printing
the Holy Word has been ever, I believe, required in them.
Men of respectable talents in their profession, and of ordi-
nary religious and moral character, I am far from doubting
that they have generally been—but other kind of.men alto-
gether, the country should be well aware they might be;
irreligious, sceptical, malignantly hating christianity,*—as
® The late Mr. Baskerville, to whom the University of Cambridge sold a
right to print certain editions of the Bible and Prayer-book, was notoriously
AN INFIDEL. In his will he uses terms of contempt for revealed religion,
** too gross to be transcribed.” (Chalmers’ Biog. Dict.) And was buried
under a windmill in his garden, as the inscription placed over his remains
“declares—‘‘ To contribute to emancipate the [reader’s] mind—from the
wicked arts of priesthood.”” Yet this man was allowed to style himself, on the
most important works with which he could be entrusted, ‘‘ Printer to the
University |”
49
(I do not speak of the present possessors of this office)
ignorant of the Hebrew Bible, the Greek original of the
New Testament, and even of the English text of the Bible,
and the most common facts of its history, the workers of
this patent have been known to be.
Little, therefore, appeared likely to be effected by commu-
nication with the patentees of this office. I have twice, how-
ever, called on Mr. Spottiswoode, during the progress of my
investigations, to mention the results of them: offering on
the last occasion to allow any Clergyman or other friend of
this gentleman’s, to inspect my marked Bible, or any of the
Bibles of my collection.
On the first occasion, he only stated that the Bible of King
James “was never given to them;” and on the last, that
they should “ see what the Universities did.”
And thus, my Lord, I close a sketch of some painful and
well-meant, however abortive, exertions in this matter, within
the pale of your Lordship’s Church. Nothing material to
the character and views of other men, have I knowingly
omitted; much, in general corroboration of my own views of
this business,* I could, I think, at any time add.
And have the honor to be,
My Lorn,
Your Lordship’s most obedient
Humble Servant,
T. CURTIS.
® Since this portion of the pamphlet has been prepared for the press, I have
received through my late neighbour, the Bishop of Calcutta, a statement which
the Regius Professor at Oxford permits him ‘‘ to shew to any person interested
in the question.”
_It mentions that the University has ‘‘ for several months been engaged in
investigations on this subject, which will cost them several hundred pounds.”
That “‘ one of their Printers has been employed in collating a copy of their
last printed edition with THE ORIGINAL of 1611—that the result is most satisfac-
tory: and that whatever Mr. Curtis may say,” the writer (Dr. Burton) '“‘ will
risk his character upon the assertion, that the departures from the edition of
1611 are of no importance whatever.’ Yet, he adds, *‘ as another result of the
E
LETTER III.
“It mast be superfluous to dwell, at any length, on the singular care and pains taken in
the formation of this great national work—[King James’ Bible.) The Kiug addressed
a letter to his Archbishops and Bishops, requiring them to inform themselves of all such
learned men within their several dioceses, as having especial skill in the Hebrew and Greek
tongues, have taken pains in their private stadies of the Scriptures, for the clearing of any
obscurities either in the Hebrew or in the Greek, or touching any difficulties or mistakings
in the former English translation. A carefal selection of these persons was made for
conducting the translation of the several parts of the Bible, regulations were made by
which each book, and each division of the Bible were submitted in turn to the judgment of
the whole body. Afler being thus prepared, the whole underwent two or three revisions
from committees specially appointed for the purpose. In cases of difficulty letters were
addreased to learned persons requesting their opinion. More than three years were spent
in preparing the work inthis laborious manner. Thus it had the benefit of ali the tkheo-
logical learning and talent to be found at that time in the kingdom; and this, not
hastily applied, but with the most ample time for due investigation and deliberation.”—
Quarterly Review, xivi.
My Loap,
Tue able* Quarterly Reviewer of Mr. Bel-
lamy’s ‘“‘ New Translation,”’ conveniently furnishes, as above,
investigation, to go back to the standard of 1611, as Mr. Curtis proposes, would
be the height of absurdity, whether we are speaking as critics, or as lovers of
the Bible.”
My observation upon this, was and is:—-Jf there be no variation of import-
ance between the modern and original editions, what possible absurdity can
there be, in abiding by the latter? The Professor pledges his character that
‘¢ no alteration of importance” could thus be made.
Another remark I make, is—If the Oxford collation have been as close as the
Professor states—it has developed at least 10,000 critical aud intentional
departures from King James’ version; and then that Dr. Burton’s and no
single man’s character in these realms, is of sufficient eminence thus to pro-
nounce upon this weighty question—the utter non-importance of ten thou-
sand critical alterations of the Holy Bible, translated by such men as the Forty-
seven of King James’ reign! The Professor must permit a humble individual
to say—it appears to him most indecorous to propose such a pledge on the
subject.
* Yet this reviewer, while on the whole he fully proves the inadequacy of
his author to the task he assumed, mistakes ¢wice in the analysis of one chapter,
(Exod, i.) the italics of modern Bibles for those of the Translators, and falsely
charges in consequence a “‘ false charge’? on Mr. Bellamy,
51
an abridged view of the precautions taken by King James and
his Translators, as well as of the admirable methods which
were adopted in the execution of their noble work. In the
Hampton Court conference, the king professed his desire that
“¢ special pains should be taken in this matter for one uniform
translation to be done by the best learned in both Universi-
ties; after them to be reviewed by the bishops, and the chief
learned of the church:”’ and the commission of translation
directed that the ‘several learned persons’’ should “ meet,
confer, and consult together, in such places as were appointed
them, so as that NOTHING SHOULD PA8s without A GENERAL
consENT.”’ When the commission was fulfilled by the delivery
of the joint labours of the Translators to his Majesty’s Printer,
I venture, my Lord, to contend that it became in natural
course, DEFUNCT; and that the Translators themselves pos-
sessed no right whatever to make in future a single critical
alteration, without a renewed authority. Typographical
errors only should have been at any time corrected.
Dr. Blayney and his Oxford coadjutors in 1769, certainly
claim, however, to have performed much of the work of
original Translators. According to his Letter to the Vice-
Chancellor, published in the Gentleman’s Magazine of that
year, and recently reprinted at the Clarendon Press, they so
“ corrected former editions,’ that they “ REFORMED THE
TEXT, to a standard of purity not to be met with in any”
edition prior to their own: for which purpose they speak of
having had “ frequent recourse to the Hebrew and Greek
originals, as on other occasions, So with a special regard to
the words not expressed in the original languages, but which
our Translators have thought fit to express in italics.’’ These
italics are found in every chapter of the Bible: and the faith-
ful preservation of the Z'ranslators’ text could require little of
the process here described.
Then, my Lord, with no authority to make the slightest
critical alteration, do the Oxford Delegates of 1769, or the
Gentlemen they employed, appear to have taken any thing
like the précautions of our venerable and /ful/y-authorised
52
Translators? Dr. Burton (see the preceding correspondence)
is my authority for stating that there do not seem to have
been any formal or written instructions given to Dr. Blayney;
little appears of any concert or meetings between the chief
learned of the church and two Universities: and still less of
consulting generally “ any learned in the land,” as in places
of ‘ special obscurity,’’ King James’ instructions enjoined.
The translation of 1611, was in fact, in every sense of the
words, the work and honor of the whole church of England
—these numerous alterations of it, the bold, unwarranted
meddling of a few Oxford Divines in acorner. As to the
basis, or materials on which they proceeded, it is most
remarkable, that neither are the versions of the Bible, ancient
or modern; nor the quotations in the Fathers, early or late,
alluded to in any way by the Delegates, or Dr. Blayney—
_ although, in obedience to King James’ fourth direction, a com-
pany of the authorised Translators was appointed to attend
specifically to the latter; and what they state with regard
to the former, is as we shall hereafter see, most material.
How then, my Lord, was a text thus elaborately formed,
likely, in utter negligence of some of its most important
sources to -be “re-formed?”* But we will now follow Dr.
Blayney’s extraordinary letter into a few of its details. And
1. Of the Brsptes hecotiatep. This ‘ Editor’ states that,
‘In the first place, according to the instructions he received,
the folio edition of 1611, that of 1701, published under the
direction of Bishop Lloyd, and two Cambridge editions of
alate date, one in quarto, the other in octavo, have been
carefully collated.” The two Cambridge editions of a “late
date” in 1769, could be of no authority. Let the reader
well remark what Mr. Lewis, the historian of our translation,
says of the edition of Bishop Lloyd. “ A very fine edition,”
* Even the list of the alterations Dr. B. and his coadjutors made, never
appears to have been given to the University. He says he intended to do this,
but ‘‘had not’’ at the period of writing his Letter ‘yet found time.’’ The
Regius Professor of Divinity states, that it never afterwards was heard of.
See the correspondence.
53
(that is, as we shall see, of noble appearance, as to size, type,
and paper, an anticipation of Mr. Reeves’ official excellence
in these respects) was published in large folio, in 1701, under
the direction of that excellent prelate, Dr. Thomas Tenison,
at that time Archbishop of Canterbury.” Then comes a spe-
cification of the chronological dates’. added by Bishop Lloyd,
(whose name therefore has frequently been given to the edi-
tion) and certain other unauthorised marginal additions which
will hereafter require attention. But what now follows, per-
fectly astounded me, my Lord, in an exhibition of authorities
on which Dr. Blayney virtually settled the text of all our
modern Bibles. ‘“ Ié is a great pity,” adds good Mr. Lewis,
“* that so excellent a design, for want of a little care and
pains, should be so ill executed. But the majority of the
_ clergy of the lower house ef Convocation, which sat two
years after, A. D. 1703, very justly took notice of the many
typographical errata of this edition,® and had too much
reason given them to complain in their humble remonstrance
of several GRoss ERRORS having been committed in some late
editions of the Holy Bible.” And it is on this occasion he
adds, “‘ this careless printing of the Holy Book grew at last
to that height, that complaints being made to his late
Majesty,” the order already adverted to was issued for the
future Archbishops of Canterbury and Bishops of London,
to appoint correctors of the authorised Presses. Dr. Blayney
so particularly notices the errors of the figures in the mar-
ginal references of this Bible, that in justice to him one
cannot but add, it appears very clearly that the “ gross”
state of the entire edition was unknown to him, and of course
* In reply to whom, I find a speech of his Grace the Archbishop of Canter-
bury, in Convocation, April 3, 1704, confirming this representation. He says,
‘¢ Those why are employed at the Queen’s Press, he had sent to more than
once with sharp messages.”’ That (like our modern Universities) ‘‘ they have
made large promises, and there has been some performance of them. Many
pages in which very gross and scandalous faults were found, have been can-
celled and suppressed,” &c.
54
to his learned employers and co-adjutors.* But then, my
Lord, can we pay this tribute to their honesty, but at the
expense of their competence to such a task? Ought they
not to have known a fact on the records of the Convocation
of the Established Church ?
So far then as the English text of the English Bible is
in question, we clearly have all our modern Bibles printed
after copies of zo authority, or after bad or erroneous autho-
rities —with the important exception of what remains of the
Authorised Version itself. For your Lordship will not fail
to observe, that I have, as above, disposed of all the Bibles
with which Dr. Blayney professes to have collated the
edition of 161]. Therefore, if collation is comparison, what
is left of his task worth the name?
And now shall we find, my Lord, that Dr. Blayney, or any
of his learned friends, kNEw the edition of 1611, to which
they evidently refer as King James’ Bible, to be the first or
original edition? The phrase, “the edition of 1611,” was
evidently written on the supposition of there being but one
edition of that year. But I personally possess Two: (the
candid reader will excuse a necessary egotism, in stating
matters of fact) the copies of the Universities are all of one
edition, I believe: but in the Archbishop’s library at Lambeth,
and lately in the possession of George Offor, Esq. of Tower
Hill, was a distinct edition of 1611, answering to my No. I.
Those of the Universities, answer tomy No. 2.; and these
editions are both in the “large black letter.” Moreover, in
the British Museum is a third, distinct edition of this date,
in a smaller black letter, and having I. Eprr. lettered on the
back, by the original direction, as it appears, of Dr. Charles
Combe, of whose library the country became the purchasers
at alarge sum. In Dr. Cotton’s list this is described as an
* His words are, ‘‘ The Marginal References even in Bishop Lioyd’s Bible,
had in many places suffered by the inaccuracy of the Press.’” No man, I appre-
hend, would have written thus, who knew the whole book, text and margin,
to have been notoriously inaccurate.
55
edition of 1611, in small black letter. True it is, with regard
to this last edition, that it exactly corresponds in various
typographical errors and minute points with a copy in Christ
Church, Oxford, and with another which I now have before me,
belonging to the Rev. the Conference of the Wesleyan Metho-
dists, dated 1613. It may be regarded, therefore, as doubt-
ful at what period between 1611 and 1613 i¢ was issued.
But the fact of there being two editions, at least, of this
year (1611)—one in the Lambeth library, and another at his
hand, is surely sufficient to prove that Dr. Blayney and the
Oxford Reformers of the text in 1769, were disgracefully igno-
rant of the materials they might have accumulated for their
task: the resolution of the Delegates bears this ignorance
of a vital point (which is the first edition) on the face of
it; and leaves it doubtful whether throughout the whole
business, they had a document of the slightest genuine
authority before them! That is, they may have mistaken
a second and more inaccurate, for the first and genuine edi-
tion of the Translators.
The Oxford delegates have commenced reprinting “ the
edition of 1611,’ which they possess. The book of “ Ge-
nesis,”’ the only part published, assists me in making the
following
CoMPARATIVE EXTRACTS.
The Oxford and Cambridge Bibles of | The Lambeth Edition of 1611, Mr.
1611, answering to my No.2, and the Orror’s, and my No. l.
late reprint of Genesis read :—
Gen. x. 16. Gen. x. 16.
And the Jebusite, and the Emo-| And the Jebusite, and the Amo-
RITE, and the Girgasite. RITE, and the Girgasite.
Gen. xix. 13. Gen. xix. 13.
For we will destroy this place, be-| For we will destroy this place, be-
cause the *crie of them 18 waxen great} cause the*cry of them 1N waxen great
Gen. xxvii. 36. ~ Gen. xxvii. 36.
And behold, now he hath ta- and behold, now he hath ta-
ken away my blessing: ‘ken away my blessing :
Gen. xxvii. 39. Gen. xvii. 39.
——--——-—-—— Behold, *thy dwel- | ——-—— Behold, *thy dwel-
ling shall be THe fatnesse of the earth. ling shall be THY fatnesse of the earth.
| Gen. xxix, 8. Gen, xxix. 8.
and TILL they rolle the stone--—— | and TELL they rolle the stone———
56
These are adduced merely as obvious instances in one book of
there having been two editions of this year. There are other minute
proofs arising from the length of the lines, and the size and character
of the ornamental letters used in each. Thus:
In my No. 2, answering tothe Cambridge | In my No. 1, answering to the Lam-
and Oxford copies (the late reprint| beth and Mr. Offor’s copy.—
of Genesis does not profess to be
more than page for page)—
Gen. xxi. 33. Gen. xxi. 33.
Name of the Lerp, the everla- Name of the Lorp, the everlasting
sting God. God,
Gen. xxv. 11. Gen. xxv. 1].
his sonne Isaac, and Isaac dwelt
by the well Lahai-roi.
Gen. xxvi. 1.
Contents—occupy seven lines.
ND there was a famine in
A\ land, beside the first
famine that was in the
dayes of Abraham. And
Isaac went unto Abime-
lech King of the Philistines, unto
Gerar.
sonne Isaac, and Isaac dwelt by the
well Lahai-roi.
Gen. xxvi. 1.
Contents, occupy siz lines.
ND there was a fa-
mine in the land, be-
sides the first famine
that was in the dayes
of Abraham. And I-
gaac went unto Abi-
melech King of the
Philistines unto Gerar.
with Rachel, ch. xxix. and marieth her. |with Rachel, ch. xxix. and marrieth her.
Gen. xxxi. 48.
children, and these cattell are my cat-
tle, and all that thou seest is mine: and
what can I do this day unto these
my daughters, or unto their children
Gen. xxxi. 43.
children, and these cattell are my cattell,
and all that thon seest, is mine: and
what can I doe this day unto these my
daughters or unto their children which
which they have borne ? they have borne?
Gen, xxxiv. 1. Gen, xxxiv. 1.
Has an ornamental letter occupying | An ornamental letter occupying the
the depth of five lines, i.e. all] depth of six lines, i.e. including a
verse 1. line of verse 2.
I could readily pursue this comparison, my Lord, through
other books of the Bible, but will only further notice, as
readily proving the distinction between my No. | and 2, that
in the latter and in all the Oxford and Cambridge copies,
(for all these principal discrepancies between the two edi-
tions, I or my friends have examined) there is in Exod.
xiv. 10. a repetition of three entire lines, containing the
57
words “ the children of Israel lift up their eyes, and behold
the Egyptians marched after them, and they were sore
afraid ;” an error which is mot in my No. 1, nor in the
I. eprr. of the British Museum.
It may be said, however, if you prove the existence of
two or more editions of 1611, have you not rather involved
the case in greater difficulty; and what could Dr. Blayney
and his coadjutors have done had they known of their ex-
istence ?
My reply is—I. The racrs of so important a matter are
first to be fully investigated; and that no man can be tolerably
competent to a collation of this kind, until he know well all
the principal editions. 2. My notion of such a duty as that
which was undertaken by Dr. Blayney, is this—it should
extend to a diligent collation of the earliest editions so as
carefully to ascertain what were mere typographical errors,*
which should be corrected; but that the public version should
adhere critically to the latest text settled by public authority :
—Dr. Blayney and the Oxford delegates did not know enough
of the matter to distinguish between typographical and critical
_alterations.
. Following the particulars of his Letter in their order—
II. Of the puncruation.—Dr. Blayney says, it ‘ has been
carefully attended to, not only with a view to preserve the
' true sense, but also uniformity, as far as possible.’ Now to
this matter, my Lord, my engagement with the University
of Cambridge having been abruptly closed, I confess I have
not been able to pay minute attention. I find, however, that
with this, as with all the other peculiarities of our authorised
text, great liberties have been taken. Dr. Blayney seems
to have been fully aware that the punctuation may “preserve”
® For it may be, that the first cdition was more inaccurate in the mere
typography than the second; while the former is still to be our only critical
guide. The “I. Edit.’ of the British Museum, corrects a typographical error,
as I regard it, of my Edit. No. 1 and 2, 1611; which read 2 Cor. iii. 3. “‘ fleshy”
for ‘* fleshly tables of the heart.” ‘‘ Fleshy”’ is likewise the reading of Dr. Blayney
and all our modern Bibles. Dr. Johnson says, ‘‘ Fleshy, plump, fat, muscu-
lous!’’ Fleshly is clearly the sense intended.
58
-
and of courseobscure or destroy “the true sense;” and I
must submit, that whenever a point affects the sense, we
have no modern authority for altering the authorised punc-
tuation.® And the position of a comma will sometimes. affect
the statement of a-scripture doctrine; ex. gr. Heb. x. 12.
that of the all-important ‘doctrine of: the atonement. Our
Translators placing their comma at “ ever,” make the verse
to read, “© This man after he had offered one sacrifice for sins
for ever, sat down on the right hand of God.”’ Dr. Blayney
and the modern Bibles, removing the comma, read, “This
man after he had offered one sacrifice for sins, for ever sat
down on ‘the right hand of God.” Your Lordship will be
aware, that this comma decides to which of two Greek clauses
of the verse (nicely balanced) the phrase ess to &:qvexes attaches.
Ill. Iratics. This class of alterations includes numeri-
cally the greatest portion; and I would with deference in-
quire, upon what more delicate or difficult point succeeding
* In Judges x.8. the colon of the Translators being removed after “‘ Israel,”
makes this difficult verse to read with perfect absurdity—‘“‘ And that year they
vexed and oppressed the children of Israel eighteen years.’’ With the cele-
brated prophecy of the seventy weeks of Daniel, a great liberty is also taken,
in removing the semicolon from the end of the first clause, or, ‘‘ seven weeks ;”’
in which, (see Wintle) the Translators advisedly follow the Masoretic pointing.
A writer in the Classical Journal, vol. xxix. 239, supplies other instances of
alterations of .the pointing in the later editions ‘‘ not for-the better.”
I will here only add, -the Paragraph marke are so largely interfered with,
that I count 101 of them altered (including 21 of them removed altogether) in
Genesis alone: that the Gospels have in the same manner the beginning and
end of a subject continually altered ; and that in reading them, to form a har-
mony, this'alteration often becomes ef consequence. The Translators, placing
this mark of a distinct subject, Matt. xxviii. 19. express their opinion that
the important commission of that verse was given in the mount of Galilee:
the modern Bibles placing it at the 18th verse, indicate a different opinion.
Parentheses (and what more important to distinguish sometimes, than those
of St. Paul?) are also thus destroyed and created: we have a new one in
Rom. v. 13 to 17, although the 13th verse is part of the sentence of the 12th ;
and in Eph. iii. 2. to chap. iv. 1. while the much clearer one, iii. 3. to the end
of 4th verse, (‘‘ as I wrote afore,” &c.) is omitted. We have also a useful one,
shewing a particular miracle to have been wrought by our Lord on his way to
work another, omitted Luke vili, 42—48,
59
scholars could have interfered with our translation? The
ablest modern critics have objected to the number which the
Translators in a scrupulous honesty have inserted, and indeed
to the doctrine of italics altogether: the modern Bibles pro-
digiously increase them.
They generally indicate, as commonly understood, that
there are no words exactly corresponding with them in
the original; and that where they occur, it has not the pre-
cise sense of the Hebrew or Greek that is expressed, but a
sense approaching it as nearly as the idiom of our language
will admit. They are also used for another important pur-
pose ; viz. to mark a doubt on the part of the Translators
as to the perfect authenticity of certain readings of the
original Scriptures—see | John ii. 23. Here, therefore, they
became a mode of exhibiting their judgment as to the state
of the original text. Closely studied, it is evident they would
become important in leading to a knowledge of the editions
of the original which they preferred, and of their entire
critical apparatus.
Dr. Blayney and his coadjutors also employ them to
express their doubts of the authenticity of particular read-
ings—see John viii. 6. where they thus, in a sense, discard
the whole clause, “ as though he heard them not.’’ Josh. iv. 6.
‘ Ask their fathers.” Josh. xiv. 10, and the conjunction, and,
Josh. xxi. 16. in the list B,. supply other instances.
Some of the past consequences of this species of inter-
ference are curious. Mr. Horne (Critical Introduction, v. ii.
p. 892, second edit.) quoting the Rev. G. Hamilton, the author
of a Codex Criticus, designed to form a correct Hebrew text
of the Bible, adduces the italics or supplemental words of the
first and last of these texts in Joshua, as proofs of what
Hebrew Bible King James’ Translators used; whereas, the
Translators here insert no supplemental words at all. “‘ Si-
milar instances,” says Mr. Hamilton, “ may be observed in
every book of the Bible!” While Mr. Horne concludes his
notice of the matter with an eulogy on “ the extraordinary
and minute attention of our venerable and much-traduced
60
Translators.” They have also this Gentleman’s meed of
praise for similar care with regard to the [modern] italics
inserted 1 Pet. v. 13. where, although the Greek New Tes-
tament contains no corresponding words to “ church that is,”
they are found in the Peshito Syriac, and the Vulgate; and
the Translators seem to have decided accordingly. 1 John iii.
16. supplies an instance of modern italics affecting the ques-
tion of the Divinity of Him, ‘ who laid down his life for us.’’
Your Lordship cannot fail to perceive, that the insertion
‘of italics in this manner by unauthorised, however learned
persons, is most dangerous in principle ; and will subscribe,
I am sure, to the opinion of Bishop Marsh, that, * No critic
of the present age ought to adopt a new reading [especially
into a public version] unless the general evidence be produced,
and the preponderance in its favour distinctly shewn.”’ By
& parity of reasoning he ought not, except in this way, to
discard or brand with doubt an old reading.. On the prin-
ciple of Michaelis, with regard to an insertion in the modern
German Testaments, each instance of the kind must be
called “a corruption” of the text of our Translators.*
But on the ground of the general purpose of the italics,
my Lord, how rash has been the modern interference !—
The instances given in which learned ment of modern times
have been misled by them, is in part a proof of this. I shall
only further ask, in what manner, without a reference to the
* Without entering into the controverted case he cites, his principle is
strictly applicable. ‘‘ An undeniable instance of unwarranted liberty has taken
place,’’ he says, ‘‘ with Luther’s German Translation. That great Reformer of
our religion, being persuaded that the well-known text, 1 John v. 7. was not
authoritative, refused it a place in his translation of the Bible. Guided by a
mistaken zeal in support of orthodox opinions, the Divines of Germany, long
after the death of Luther, inserted this passage, and yet retained the name of
Luther's version in the title. Even had the passage been genuine, 1T wouLD
STILL BB A CORRUPTION OF THE TEXT OF LUTHER.”
+ Dr. John Taylor, of Norwich, has constructed his whole Hebrew Con-
cordance, on the principle of considering the English italic words, ‘* not in the
Hebrew text.”” He published his work happily before Dr. Blayney’s alterations ;
which, iowever, greatly interfere with it.
61
ancient versions, are those “ many’ passages to be settled
which have words that occur but once, and which often affect
the whole structure and meaning of the passage? The learned
German critic just alluded to, does not hesitate, your Lord-
ship knows, to say, that with regard to the New Testament,
the ancient versions and the writings of the early fathers are
in many instances of more importance to consult, than any
of the Greek MSS. which have come down to us; because
they are of earlier date.
Our Translators were deeply impressed with their difficult
duty here ; —‘ not only comparing the channels with the
fountains,” in the language of Johnson, their early Vindicator,
‘translations with the original, which was essential; but
also channels with channels, which was abundantly useful.”
“‘Neither did we think much,” say they, “to consult the
translators or commentators, Chaldee, Hebrew, Syriac, Greek,
or Latin; no, nor the Spanish, French, Italian, or Dutch ;
neither did we disdain to review that which we had done,
and to bring back to the anvil that which we had hammered.”
But in our modern Bibles the whole face and structure of
their noble work has been disturbed, and but too often marred,
without any pretence to such care :—hundreds of nouns sub-
stantive left as an integral part of their text, have been
‘degraded from that station; and many thousand verbs and
particles. Out of about twenty cases of one verb (}'N)
instanced by Dr. Gesenius, of Halle, as always’ containing
the substantive verb ¢o be, I have counted thirteen cases*
altered in our modern Bibles into italics, as though it did not
contain it. ‘‘ God’s offspring,” in truth, my Lord, “ have
been bastardized,’’ as a learned Examinant of the following
List observed, in not a few instances of these transmutations.
Threatenings and promises of the divine word, have been
materially, often ignorantly, weakened; historical state-
ments obscured; prophecies, even of the Messiah, made
* These thirteen passages are, Gen. v. 24. xxxvii. 29. xli. 8, 15, 24, 39.
xiii. 13, 36. Numb. xi. 6. xiv. 42. Deut. xxii. 27. Ruth iv. 4, 1 Kiuga xviii, 10.
62
doubtful with regard to their object ; prohibitions converted
into injunctions ; and negations into positive assertions. See
the list B. I believe, ere I close, I shall substantiate these
opinions unanswerably.*
* To the general reader, it may be convenient that we should here bring
together (at the hazard of some repetition) a few instances of these alter-
ations—in all of which, as a learned friend has said, ‘‘ The words falsely put
into italics are as much inthe original, as a man’s money is in his pocket, when
it is not seen.’ The words in italics are the altered ones. The remarks, of
course, are designed for.the mere English reader.
OLD TESTAMENT.
Gen. vii. 22.—‘* All which was in the dry land died ;”’ i. e. in the flood. This
is an alteration of 1769. It does not mean the dryer heights or hills merely,
but the whole of the dry land of the earth, as distinct from the waters. Two
instances of a similar alteration (from the Authorised Version) are found in
Gen. i. 9, 10. and four others in Exod. xiv. 16=-29.
Gen. xx. 17.—*‘ And they bare children.”’ From a Hebrew verb signifying
to bear a child (Gesenius): not bare burdens, evil usage, or any thing of a
more. general nature. .
Gen. xxiv. 52.—‘* Worshipped, bowing himself to the earth.” Not bowing
to the earth, but bowing his whole person in the entire prostration of the east,
to God. 7
Gen: xlii. 11—34,—Five cases of ‘‘ true men:’”’ as opposed to spies. Not
true brethren, or true Canazanites. There was no other way of expressing
the plural.of the original here.
Exod. xix. 12.—‘‘ Take heed to yourselves that ye go not up.’ Putting
not (ignorantly) into italics here, makes a strong prohibtion to which aA PENALTY
OF DEATH was attached, a command. The Hebrew decidedly prohibits the guing
up into the mount,
Lev. iv. 13—-27.—Three instances of ‘‘ somewhat against any of the com-
mandments of the Lord concerning things which should not be done.” A
command concerning a thing which should not be done is a prohibition; so
Gesenius renders it. By putting these words into italics, the sin is said to be
doing any of the commandments of the Lord which ought not fo be done! !
And it is thrice said to be so. .
Lev. xxiv. 10.—‘ This son of an Israelitish eooman :’? meaning an Israelitess,
and because he had a father of a different nation ; thus, perhaps, accounting for
his blasphemy. The Hebrew word strictly marks the sex, which ‘‘ Israelitish’’
alone would not.
Ps. Ixxxix. 19.—‘‘ I have laid help upon one that is mighty; exalted one
chosen,’’ &c. The italics destroy or render doubtful the final reference to
Christ, or indeed to any one person. But the Hebrew is clearly in the
singular,
Eccles. v. 8.—‘* He that is higher than the highest regardeth :” i.e. oppres-
sion. The italics destroy the reference to the Most High.
63
TV. Heaps, or Contents or Cuaprers. “ Considerable
alterations have been made in the heads or contents prefixed
to the chapters,”” continues Dr. Blayney, “as will appear on
inspection; and though the Editor is unwilling to enlarge
upon the labour bestowed by himself in this. particular, he
cannot avoid taking notice of the peculiar obligations, which
both himself and the public lie under to the Principal of
Hertford College, Mr. Griffith, of Pembroke College, Mr.
Wheeler, Poetry Professor, and the late Warden of New
College, so long as he lived to bear a part in it; who, with
a prodigious expense of time, and inexpressible fatigue to
themselves, judiciously corrected and improved the rude and
imperfect draughts of the Editor.”
The portion of Dr. Blayney’s labours respecting which he
thus acknowledges his “peculiar’’ and strongest “‘obligations”’
for assistance, is that which as was intimated in the corre-
spondence, (see p. 15) Drs. D’Oyley and Mant entirely aban-
don, as well as the Universities and King’s Printers, of late
years. But they long obtained an unmerited preference over
the closer and simpler ‘ contents’ of chapters in the Bible of
NEW TESTAMENT.
Matt. ix. 5.--Thy sins are forgiven thee.” Making it doubtful whose sins.
(Alteration of 1769.)
Matt. xii. 31.—‘‘ The blasphemy against the-Holy Ghost.” Making its hostile
character toward the Spirit of God doubtful. Dr. Clarke, the Arian, says, that
- the Scriptures never charge men with sinning against the Holy Ghost.
Matt. xiii. 19.—‘‘ Then cometh the wicked one.” Making it doubtful whether
the devil be intended. But see the parallel places of Mark and Luke. Altered
1769.
John xviii. 38.—** I find in him no fault at aii.’”” Weakening a strong testi-
mony to the spotless character of our Redeemer. Also altered 1769.
Acts xiii. 25.—* John said, I am not /e.’” Making what or who he denied
himself to be, unintelligible.
Acts xxii. 28.—‘‘ But.I was free born.”” Rendering doubtful the whole
emphasis of the passage.
1 Cor. xiii. 3.—‘‘ Bestow all my goods to feed the poor.” Not to feed myself,
which this may leave the possible sense. Altered in 1769.
Heb.x. 10.—** The offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.” Or once
and for ever, as it means. The other sacrifices here spoken of were all offered
once : this only once for all,
64
King James; a large number of the Bibles in which they
are found are still in use, and they are worth pausing over,
as exhibiting some of the doctrinal partialities of the Reform-
ers of 1769. Certain obnoxious doctrines are here softened ;
“man’s fall,’ is not ‘ man’s shameful fall,’ as the Translators
left it. (Gen. iii.) ‘The church maketh confession of their
natural corruptions,’ Is. lxiv. (Trans.) is ‘Confesseth her own
unworthiness,’ (Blayney). ‘ What we were by nature,’ Eph. in.
(Trans.) ‘The Ephesians—their former corrupt heathen state,’
(BI.) agreeing with the removal from the,top of the page in
other places of ‘None is just,’ ‘ None is clean,’ ‘ The heart
wicked,’ &c.
So the prominence given to Christ (as a subject of pro-
phecy in particular) appears to have been objectionable.
Deut. xviii. 15. ‘ Christ, the prophet, is to be heard,’ (Trans.)
is exchanged for, ‘ A prophet to arise like unto Moses, is to
be hearkened unto, (B].)—Isa. xvi. ‘ Moab exhorted to yield
obedience to Christ’s kingdom,’ (Trans.) ‘ To yield obedience
to the throne of David,’ (Bl.)—xxii. ‘ Eliakim prefiguring
the kingdom of Christ, his substitution,’ (Trans.) ‘ Eliakim’s
advancement in Shebna’s room,’ (Bl.)—xxviii. ‘ The residue
shall be advanced in the kingdom of Christ,’ (Trans.) ‘ God
will be the glory and strength of the residue.’ (Bl.)—l. ¢ Christ
sheweth that the dereliction of the Jews is not to be imputed
to him, ‘by his ability to save.’ (Trans.) * The dereliction of
the Jews to be imputed to their sins, and not to God’s inabi-
lity to save, (Bl.)—li. ‘ An exhortation after the pattern of
Abraham to trust in Christ,’ (Trans.) who make him the
subject of the entire chapter; ‘ The righteous are exhorted
by the example of Abraham to trust in God,’ (Bl.) who makes
the whole chapter to regard ‘God’ in a general sense only.
Again, while generally the Reformers of 1769, lengthen
these contents, in those of Heb. i. where our Translators had
said, ‘ Christ is preferred before the angels, both in person
and office,’ Blayney omits the important words, ‘both in
person and,’ and makes the superiority only official. In the
next chapter, where they say, ‘ We ought to be-obedient to
65
Christ, because he vouchsafed to take our nature upon him ;’
Blayney substitutes, ‘The obligations we are under to give
more earnest heed to the gospel doctrine.’* Again, 1 John i.
(Trans.) ‘ He describeth the person of Christ, (see verse 2)
in whom we have life eternal ;’ (Bl.) ‘ The apostle professeth
to declare what he had formerly seen and known of the word
of life.” Dr. Blayney and his coadjutors seem also to have
been strongly attached (according to these summaries of
their doctrine) to the heathen deity Fortune, of whom the
Bible of the Translators certainly knew nothing. ‘Thus the
predictions of the angel, who is called Jehovah, Gen xvi.
are said to be “ informing’ Hagar “ of her and her son’s for-
tunes ;”” and Gen. xxv. the struggling of the children during
Rebekah’s pregnancy, “a token of the future fortunes of
their posterity.’ But enough, perhaps, on this point, as
these ‘ Contents’ are suppressed.
The most extraordinary part of the business is, that it
should never have occurred to these learned persons that
they were thus writing an uncalled-for comment on the
whole text of the Bible in the names of Forty-seven other
and abler men; and that your Lordship’s Church should have
received, should have unhesitatingly and universally circu-
lated; and then again, should have withdrawn such a com-
® Jast an Unitarian phrase. We are bound in charity, from his subscription
to the articles of the Established Church, to believe that Dr. Blayney was not
an Unitarian ; but he could write very unsoundly on this great topic of Christ’s
Divinity. He denied that Jer. xxiii. 6. contains any proof of it; and when
pressed in controversy on the subject declared, that in his judgment, this was
“‘a doctrine which draws its decisive proofe FROM THE NEw TESTAMENT ONLY ;"’
—a concession of which Dr. Carpenter (See Nares, on the Unitarian Improved
Version) has not failed to make triumphant use. What said Bishop Horsley
of a loose writer of this description a few years after? ‘‘ We judge him not
further than he pronounces his own condemnation. Bat we cannot think that
man’s faith built upon a strong foundation, who, with some of the worst of the
ancient Guostics, sets the Old Testament at variance with the New; who per-
* ceives not that religion, under the law and the gospel, was in substance the same,
only differing in the external forms :”’ ‘‘ Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, and
to-day, and for ever.”’
F
66
ment, at the dictation of the Delegates of the Oxford Univer-
sity ; the very names of those who acted in this grave matter
(particularly in the withdrawment of this comment) being
wholly unknown to the public, and I presume to three-fourths
of the Right Reverend bench. :
IV. The Corumn Tirtes. “ The running titles at the top
of the columns in each page, how trifling a circumstance
soever it may appear, required no small degree of thought
and -attention.’’ Akin in principle to the abandoned com-
ment above, is the continued* one here alluded to, which
contains some corruptions of the doctrine and statements of
the Bible, as understood by our Translators, that I am far,
my Lord, from regarding as trifling! ‘ Man’s righteousness,’
is their column-title of that part of Isa. xiv. which contains
the memorable phrase, ‘“ And all our righteousnesses are as
filthy rags.’’ Dr. Blayney avoids this for—* The calling of
the Gentiles,’ the subject of the Ixv. chapter. So we have for
‘None is just,’ ‘ Allare alike.’ Eccl. vii. and viii. two other
subjects substituted, ‘ Patience and wisdom,’ ‘ Kings are to
be respected ;’ and ‘ None righteous,’ Rom. iii. exchanged for
‘The Jews universally sinners.’ (Bl.) The first two of these
corruptions are in the last Camb. 8vo. Ref. Bible, finished
at the period of my visit to that University. ‘ None is just,’
Job xxv. is thus also withdrawn; ‘ None is clean,’ Prov. xx.
‘The heart wicked,’ Jer. xvii. ‘ God’s justice in punishing
sinners—God’s ways equal,’ Ezek. xviii. (Trans.), exchanged
for ‘Every man shall stand or fall by his own good or bad
actions,’ (Bl.) and Camb. 8vo. 1831. My Lord, was there
any thing honorable in the animus of these alterations ?
The Church of England, we know, furnished during the dast
century, but too many advocates of a righteousness by works,
which made ‘ the grace of God no more grace;’ but they
should have contented themselves with a fair field, and fair
* it is largely continued, as in two cases out of the three that withdraw the
doctrine of universal corruption from notice. Occasionally I find the old titles
used.
67
weapons of controversy ; thus silently to withdraw an import-
ant sanction of a directly opposite opinion, was surely any
thing but fair or becoming.
Our modern Bibles retain several instances of the with-
drawment of the name and character of our blessed Redeemer
from the top of the page. As Ps. xxii.‘ A prophecy of Christ,’
(Trans.) (one hardly need add, quoted by all the Evangelists
as such) changed to ‘ David complaineth in distress,’ Bl. and
the modern Bibles, Oxford, 1828, and Camb. 1831—Prov.
viii, ‘Curisr’s ETERNITY,’ (Trans.) ‘The call of wisdom,’
(BI.) and Oxford, 1828 ; ‘ Excellency, &c. of wisdom,’ Camb.
1831.-—Jer. xxxi. ‘ Christ promised,’ (Trans.) ‘ Rahel mourn-
ing is comforted,’ (Bl. and modern Bibles) —Dan. vii. ‘Christ’s
dominion,’ (Trans.) © The interpretation thereof,’ [%. e. the
vision just before] (Bl. and modern Bibles)—* Christ’s yoke,’
‘Rich in Christ,’ ‘ Fools for Christ,’ ‘Christ our praise,’
‘Christ glorified in his saints,’ ‘Christ above the angels,’
(Heb. i.) ¢ Called in Christ,’ are other instances in the New
Testament of references to him finally withdrawn.
Other doctrinal views of the Translators, reformed by those
of the Oxford Divines of 1769, will be interesting to some of
my readers. I shall merely for the sake of brevity put down
the withdrawn doctrine. The reader can generally find the
substituted one of Blayney in the modern Bibles. Ps. lvii.
‘God saveth his.’—Isa. x. ‘ A remnant saved.’—xliv. * God’s
love to his chosen people.’—xlvi. ‘God beareth his.’—xlviii.
‘God trieth his.’—Jer. xv. ‘God saveth his.’—xxxi. ‘ Ever-
lasting love.’—id. ‘ A new covenant and everlasting.’—Acts v.
¢ Ordained to life.’ —Eph. i. ‘ The election of the saints.’
My Lord, after the example of their Geneva brethren, our
venerable Translators often chose for the head of the page,
‘some notable word or sentence for the help of the memory ;””
and there is frequently an evident and honorable effort at
catching a careless eye,® in the selection of the beautiful
* Dr. Blayney and his coadjutors seem wholly to have overlooked this inten -
tion, and to have attempted to make the tops of their pages abridged contents
68
mottos thus placed. I will copy a few of these, of which our
modern Bibles are denuded. Exod. xxxiii. ‘ God not seen.’
—Deut. viii. ‘To avoid all idolatry.’—ix. * God, a fire.’—xix.
‘A false witness.’—xxiii. “The punishment. of whoredom.’—
xxx. ‘Mercy to the repentant.’—Job xviii. ‘ The wicked’s
fall.’—xix. ‘ Job’s hope.’ [see ver. 26.]—xx. ‘ The wicked’s
portion.’—xxi. ‘ The wicked prosper—All alike in death.’—
xxvii. ‘ Hypocrite’s hope.’ —Ps. xxi. ‘ Trust in God.’—
xxxix. § Man is vanity.’—xlvi. ‘ God our refuge.’—xlviii.
‘ Zion’s beauty.’—1]. ‘ Pay thy vows.’—li. A contrite heart.’
Ixii. ‘ Wait on God.’—xc. ‘ Man’s life short.’—cvii. ‘ God’s
present help in trouble.’ — cxvi. ‘§ The saints’ death.’ —
cxxxix. ‘ Nothing secret to the eyes of God.’—Prov. v. ‘ Flee
whoredom.’—ix. ‘ Wisdom’s feast—The just blessed—The
good tongue.’—xxix. ‘ God's word pure.’—Eccles. x. ‘ Repent
betimes.’—Isa. viii. ‘Seek God only.’?.... (I must unwil-
lingly omit the rest I have noted in the Old Testament.)
Matt. xi. ‘To take the cross.’—xv. ‘Man’s tradition.’—id.
‘ What defileth.’—xvi. ‘ Pharisees’ leaven.’— Mark xiv.
‘Watch and pray.’—xvi. ‘ Unbelief reproved.’—Luke ix.
‘ The least great.’—xi. ‘ Ask, seek, knock.’—John iii. ‘ The
force of faith.’—v. ‘ Search the Scriptures.’—viii. ‘ True free-
dom.’—xiv. ‘ Who loveth Christ.’—xvi. ‘ Ask and have.’—
Acts v. ‘ Lying to God.’—1 Cor. vi. ¢ Our price.’—ix. ‘ Run
to obtain.—xvi. § Stand in faith.’—2 Cor. v. ‘ New creatures.’
—Eph. v. ‘ Awake from sleep.—Phil. iii. ‘ Belly-gods.’—
Col. i. ‘ Christ, the Head.’—Heb. ix. ‘The force of Christ’s
death.’—x. ‘ The living way.’—xi. ‘ The force of faith.’—
James i. ‘Ask in faith.’—id. ‘God tempteth not.’—1 Pet. i.
‘Our price.’ (again)—2 Pet. i.‘ Precious faith—-Who are
blessed.’(Trans.) ‘ Of Christ’s second coming,’ Bl. and the mo-
dern Bibles; here putting a new and false gloss, it is presumed,*
merely—a thing impossible; while the attempt destroyed a beautiful feature of
King James’ Bible.
_ * See what follows in the chapter. A clerical friend (if I may so call him)
high in office in one of our public institutions, which occasionally distributes
69
on the phrase, ‘Have made known unto you the power and
coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.’ 1 John i. ‘ God is light.’
—iv. * Try the. spirits.’—Rev. ii. ‘ To hold fast.’
V. Mareinat Appirions AND ALTxRATIONS. We come
to the last but not least important of the avowed alterations
of 1769 ; those which were made in the margins of the Bible.
The sin, my Lord, has here been, like the chief of the errors we
charge on the Romanists,* in the way of excess. The mar-
gin has been so crowded with unauthorised additions, that
the far greater part of the Bibles issued from the authorised
Presses, (Mr. Collingwood has stated, I think, 14-15ths, or
a similar large propbdrtion) are without any marginal notes
or references whatever. That is, for the sake of the few who
are accommodated with the extra notes and references—the
vast majority of purchasers and the poorest in all cases, are
entirely deprived of the Translators’ own. I. regard this as
a great abuse. The Translators in their first and small
8vo. of 1612, print all their marginal notes and references.
The former are an integral part of the version. They speak
of what they have thus “ set in the margin,’’ as “ profitable
for the finding out of the sense of the scriptures, when the
text is not so cleare ;” as what * must needs doe good; YEA,
IS NECESSARY, AS WE ARE PERSUADED.” (Translators to the
Reader.) If necessary to finding out the sense, let it be re-
membered, they are a portion of the words of eternal life ;
and until we arrive at “ the sense’ of the words, it is impos-
sible we can receive the mind of the Spirit. I would discard
then, my Lord, azy human additions that were the means of
_ the Bible, while he thought me too zealous for these misinterpretations to be
removed, stated, that from this very text he had been assuring his flock the
preceding Sunday, that the first coming of our Saviour must be meant. Might
not a shrewd old woman say, he contradicted what was in her Bible?
* << I know of few absurdities,” says Mr. Blanco White, ‘‘ that can be com-
pared to this. In the absence of the physician, a patient mixes his prescription
with every quack medicine that the neighbours recommend. Having swallowed
the whole, he now comforts himself with the assurance that he is in the safe
side !
70
withdrawing this from the humblest reader. And these were
carefully constructed within appointed limits. ‘‘ No mar-
ginal rules at all” were “to be affixed, but only for the
explanation of the Hebrew and Greek words which cannot
without circumlocution so briefly and fitly be expressed in
the text.” They are strictly verbal explanations; rarely
indeed do they become a mere human comment. “ Some
complained,’”’ says Fuller, on the first publication of the ver-
sion, “that they could not see into the sense of Scripture,
for lack of the spectacles of those Genevan annotations.”
Our noble Translators were the maturer Protestants—but
we are compelled, my Lord, if we would receive their sense
and entire translation, to use the Oxford “ spectacles” of
1769.®
As to the importance of these readings one would, from the
statement of the Translators, take it to be more obvious is the
case of the poor and unlearned than in that of those who can
consult the original scriptures. They often remove a serious
difficulty.t ‘‘ I have found in collating many of them with the
originals,’’ says Dr. A. Clarke, “ that those (readings) in the
margin are to be preferred to those in the text in the propor-
tion of at least eight to ten.”
Dr. Blayney claims to have translated “ many of the pro-
per names’’-—to have “ considered and rectified some obvious
and material errors in the Chronology’’—and to have added
with great care various additional references. The first was
a task little needed. “It is the constant practice of Holy
Writ,” as Horsley observes, “to accompany the mention
* I am happy to corroborate this view of the matter, by the opinion of ¢e
competent a judge as Dr. Adam Clarke. Speaking of additions that he could
readily have made to the marginal readings of his Bible, he says, ‘‘ Had I in-
serted some of my own, then my text would be no longer the text of the Autho-
vised Version, but an ALTERED TRANSLATION, for the marginal readings consti-
tute an essential part, properly speaking, of the Authorised Version.”
+ Let the reader only carefully ‘egard the two connected with the vow of
Jephthah. They remove entirely the imputation of his having offered his
daughter as a burnt-offering. |
|
of enigmatical or allusive names with an exposition of the
name” in the text. The Translators supplied, as they allege,
what besides was needful, in the margin.
Thus they explain Abram’s original name in the margin
as meaning a high father: the name of Abraham given
him as the father of many nations, they do noé further
explain to the reader than by the reason for it given by
God himself in the text. Able critics see a difficulty in
the addition of a single letter of the original so materially
changing the sense, as to warrant the literal translation of the
word by “ A father of many nations.” The able Ainsworth,
says, it is the ‘ High father of many nations ;’ (resenius, the
‘Father of a multitude.’ “Israel,’? (Gen. xxxii, 28.) the
Translators leave also to be explained by the text. Blayney
says, ‘ That is, a prince of God.’ Gesenius, with greater plau-
sibility, (from MU, to wrestle, and ON, God,) ‘ A wrestler
or combatant with God;’ referring to Hosea xii. 4. Perhaps
another case of the opinion of these Oxford Divines, on topics
upon whieh our Translators ehese to be silent, may suffice.
It is that of the Egyptian monarch’s surname of Joseph
—Zaphnath-paaneah. ‘In the Coptic,’ say they, ‘a revealer
of secrets, or, the man to whom secrets are revealed.’ St.
Jerome from the same language translates it by Salvator
mundi,to which the Septuagint appreaches; while Gesenius
thinks i/ ¢s a conruPTiION of the word in the Hebrew, which
has given rise to the marginal explanation of our modern
eritics. |
in the Chronology, my Lord, we have a topic upon which
the Translators forbore altogether to enter. They well knew
the difficulty of deciding between very ancient adverse
claims: and the discussions of modern times only appear
to confirm the propriety of ranking ¢his among the unset-
tled territory of biblical criticism. The best works are but
collections of materials. The modification of Archbishop
Usher’s system, sometimes called, ‘The Bible and Autho-
72
rised’ Chronology was first added to the margin of our Bibles
about 1680.*
A single specimen of the influence of an unfounded system
of this kind will here suffice. It has induced (see the List B.)
the modern editors to add in the margin of the book of
Judges a sort of running comment, to shorten the genera}
period which the text seems to embrace ; in fact, to reduce it
from about the 450 years which St. Paul and Josephus, Mi-
chaelis, Eichhorn, Hales, Jahn, and others assign to this book,
to 350 years, the period consistent with Usher’s system. This
has rendered it needful to localise certain deliverances of the
Israelites: (as that of Barak, for instance, though all the
tribes were evidently expected in the battle); and to make
other of the Judges contemporaneous who are said to have
arisen © after” one another. The heroic age of the Sophe-
tim of Israel is thus broken up into mere fragments, resem-
bling those in which that of all other early history appears
—pbut a great point of the historical truth and beauty of the
Bible is thus resigned. In such circumstances “ the obvious
and material errors’’ corrected in 1769 can have little interest
for the close student of the Bible. Let him urge his learned
friends to grapple with the difficulty of fixing the great lead-
ing points—and look at the remark of our List B as to the
_Chronology of another of the early books, of the Bible, #. e.
Job.
The references compared with those of the Translators
are increased in the proportion of about sixty-five to nine.t
‘Fhese venerable men profess also to have duly executed this
department of their labour, or to have supplied “ such quo-
tations of places marginally set down as shall serve for the |
fit reference of one scripture to another.”” My Lord, we
* I am surprised that so accurate and learned a writer, as Mr.;Fownshend,
should have been misled to adopt this phrase. See the Introduction to his
able Arrangement of the Old Testament, 2 vols. 8vo.
+ Being in the Translators’ Bible 8,980—in Blayney’s 64,983.
73.
have in this vast addition of references again, (it was unavoid-
able) party bias; fanciful allusions, and mere verbal, and
often mistaken parallels. A learned Scottish writer* com-
. plains of the Popish notion of regeneration by baptism, being
carefully supported in the references of John iii.; those of Heb.
vi. 2. in like manner are made to support episcopal confirma-
tion. That while these references are the most expensive
additions to the printing, they are little consulted in reading
the Bible, we have some proof also in the strange blunders,
such as references to verses in a chapter, which it does not
contain, &c. that have been left for twenty, thirty, and forty
years uncorrected. On the whole Drs. D‘Oyley and Mant,
have wisely withdrawn them from their Bible as not resting
‘fon the same authority” with those of the Authorised
Version ; and will in this, I trust, be speedily followed by the
Universities. The fact is, there is not the shadow of autho-
rity for introducing them; they are virtually a private com-
ment on the whole text; and no well-ordered mind, that felt
_ the importance of keeping the sword of the Spirs¢ sharp and
bright, would, in the circumstances of this case, have added
any of them.
————_~——— Grant they were
_ The handers down; can they from thence infer
The right to interpret? Or would they alone
Who brought the present claim it for their own ?
Having thus briefly traversed all the alleged improvements
of Dr. Blayney, I must again subscribe myself,
My Lorp,
Your Lordship’s most obedient Servant,
T. CURTIS.
P.S. 1 trust to be able to supply in another Postcript a
weightier coniment than my own on these tmprovements.
I would only here inquire, my Lord, as Dr. Blayney dwells
with evident satisfaction on what he thinks was accomplished
in this way in 1769, why should we not, if his alterations
ne ne
* Dr. Lee, of Edinburgh.
74
shall be still retained as such by the Universities, have this
stated on the title-page of our future Bibles? ‘ Altered, im-
proved, and finally settled’ [or something to this effect] by.
the Oxford Divines of 1769. It would be mere justice to Dr.
Blayney: would be a satisfaction to those who could rely
on the critical judgment of the modern Delegates and Syndics,
to be informed that it was an Improved Orthodox Version
which they possessed: and the Unitarians would not then be
allowed to stand alone in this kind of claim. [ must feel,
however, as perhaps the country would, that the Unitarian
Improved Version would atill have taken a precedence from
which the Church would find it difficult to dislodge it, on the
point of candour, or in introducing its alleged “ improve-
ments” eo nomine.
LETTER IV.
“« Whereas the ground of faith is the word of God contained in the Scriptures, it must-needs be
a work of highest consequence to preserve those Sacred Oracles in the original purity, freed as
much as may be from all possibility of error, that’ may arise either by the negligence of
scribes, injury of times, &c.""—- Bishop Walton's Prospectus to hie Polygiott.
** And if you continue to take such pains for the setting forth of God's word as you do, although in the
mean season you suffer some snubs, many slanders, lies, and reproaches for the same,. yet one
day he will requite altogether. And the same word, as St. John saith, which shall judge every
man at the last day, must needs shew favor to them that new favor it.”—Cranmer to the
Vicar. General, in 1537,
My Lorp,
In introducing the two Lists which will occupy
the chief part of this my closing letter, I can touch, I find,
but upon one principal point in which the text:-of our Autho-
rised Version has been much disturbed--that of the mode of
distinguishing certain Divine names. Of these. alterations,
many of which I trace to him, Dr. Blayney gives no intima-
tion. :
”
75
The Translators, it has been said, wherever they found the
word Jehovah, i711), in the original of the Old Testament
indicate it by the term Lorp, printed in capital letters. In
the first edition in roman, dated 1612, (which I possess) it is
printed in small capitals, as in most of our modern Bibles.
This distinction the Synod of Dort notices, and indeed follows,
in directing the Belgic Version to express that important
name by Heers, similarly printed. (Acta Synod. Dort.
sess. xii.) Capellus de Vera Pronuntiatione Nominis Janova,
edited by Reland, 1707, and various other learned men
notice and approve the distinction so far as it goes. For it is
well known that many of the learned have expressed a wish
that the term Jehovah itself had been retained.
To this general rule, however, there are-exceptions. When
the Hebrew Adon or Adonai (rendered also by the word Lord,
only in that case printed with no other distinction than the L
being a capital letter, thus, Lord)—precedes Jehovah in the
original, they have been compelled to translate Jehovah by
the word Gop, and print the compound thus, Lord Gop.
Numerous instances occur in the prophets Ezekiel and Amos.
Here then are ¢wo authorised words by which Jehovah is
regularly translated; only the English sign of it, whether
Lorp or Gop, is always printed in capitals or small capitals.*
When Al, Aloah, or Alehim (all translated God) follow
Jehovah in the original, then the Lonp as usual, expresses
the latter, and we have the form Loan God. In Psalms lxviii.
20, and Ixxxv. 8, respectively, we have Gop the Lord, and
God the Logp ; to indicate in the first case, the occurrence of
Jehovah before Adonai, which is rare: and in the last, that it
follows Al, or SNM, which is also rare. I never find Jehovah
when it occurs alone indicated by Gop, in the Bibles of 1611.
In Exod. xxxiv. 23, prescribing the attendance of all the
® In the few instances in which m, Jah, occurs, it may be as well stated here,
they also print Lorp, or Jah; taking it apparently for a portion of the word
Jehovah. Thus Ainsworth, in Ps. lxviii. on Jah, * Of the same effect as Jeho-
vah, but more seldom used.’
76
males-of Israel, on the three great feasts of the law; we have
the three Divine Names above distinguished—brought very
significantly together. ‘Thrice in the year shall your men-
children appear before Ssqw: ws a JIN the Lord
Gop, the God of Israel ;” our Translators indicating them (in
1611) as your Lordship will perceive, by a three-fold distinc-
tion in their mode of printing these names. This is lost in our
modern Bibles, which print them “the Lorp God, the God
of Israel.”
This, my Lord, is not a fit opportunity for discussing the
precise import of these names. ‘That they have very distinct
and very important meanings, I cannot suppose that any
respectable theologian will deny; and I venture to contend,
that with the facility of distinguishing them in our Bibles,
which the venerable Translators supplied, the chief instruction
they convey may be communicated, and is abundantly worth
communicating, to any English reader, or English audience.
Dr. Nares (Remarks on the Improved Version of the Unita-
rians, p. 88, 9,) observes, that ‘‘ perhaps there was more of
revelation in the Hebrew titles of God, than in any thing else.
It is easy,” he adds, “ to raise the cry of Cabala, Mysticism,
&c. against those who refer to such remote matters, but
sacred Scripture is sacred Scripture; we must not give up
the Bible.” Bishop Horsley—that “ the real etymology and
import of them is a matter of great moment : and while M1"
is by far the most important, that neither this, nor ON and its
derivatives were of human invention or ascription to God ;”
but “on the contrary, are names of God which he assumed
to himself, in his communications to the patriarchs as decla-
rative of himself and his perfections.” (Review of Geddes’
Bible.) . |
Jehovah FV is by far the most important. It has been
said to occur 6800 times in the Hebrew Bible:* our Trans- |
* Adonai, the other word rendered Lord, about 1200 times. What a testi-
mony does the comparison suggest to the general doctrine of God’s self-
existence !
77
lators took, as we have seen, the greatest pains to indicate its
presence. ‘It expresses the self-existence of God, and all that
is involved in the idea of self-existence.” (Horsley) —“ Jeho--
vah is to be expounded,” says Abrabanel, “ of the Divine
essence only ; Elohim, on the other hand, 1s to be understood
in relation to external things.” Ever preserving this dis-
tinction, the sacred writers do not except in the single
instance of PINAY MV, bring the word i335, Jehovah into
grammatical construction, nor connect with it personal pro-
nouns. It has been well called the ineffable,the incommunicable,
and the proper name of the Deity. ‘ He who reads Adonai for
Jehovah, puts ‘a false sense” upon various passages of Scrip-
ture, says Relandus: “ not only says what God does not say,
(Gataker on Exod. vi. 3.) but that indeed which does not at
all agree with it :” and Leusden, on Ps. Ixxxiii. 18. “ Qué
pronunciat Adonai sic legeret: ut cognoscant te solum
‘momine tuo esse Adonai, quod FALSUM est: nam nomen Ado-
nai in S. Scriptura sepe hominibus tribuitur.
Now, my Lord, is it not startling to see that in the chief
seats of our national and biblical learning, a grammatical pecu-
liarity of the original Scriptures, (that of Jehovah never being
put into construction, except in one case)—of more import-
ance, perhaps, than any other peculiarity in any of the gram-
mars of the earth, should be cast, as it were, to the winds! Je-
hovah never calls himself the Jehovah of any people, place, or
thing; not even the Jehovah of Israel ; only of all the hosts of
his creatures, collectively. But having in six places of the
Scripture described himself as the Adonai, Lord, or Sovereign
of all or of the whole earth—in five of these places he is made
to call himself in our modern Bibles, and to the English reader,
the Lorp or Jehovah of all the earth! The passages are Josh.
iii. 11. Ps. xcvii. 5. Mic. iii. 13. Zech. iv. 14. and vi. 5. (Camb,
Bib. 8vo. 1831.) Thus also, these passages stand in Dr. Blay-
ney : while four out of the five are correctly printed in Baskett,
4to. Lond. 1767, two years before Dr. Blayney’s edition
appeared. Is it possible he could make these four altera-
78
tions? They have, at any rate, been made and continued at
both Universities, for these sixty years. dnd Dr. Blayney
passed each of them at least four times, according to his
printed Letter.
My Lord, this must be taken as.a specimen of the accurate
Hebrew learning: of this editor. I could produce other
instances, (seven in one Psalm, and five in another,) of the
alteration of Adonai to Jehovah :* others, of Lorp to Lord, or
the reverse alteration. Also, of various passages in which
personal pronouns are prefixed to this important name.t But
two further specimens from the Bible of 1769 must suffice. In
Ps. cxl. 8. we have, * O Gop, the Lorp,’t equal to “ O
Jehovah, Jehovah !’’ a repetition of the word never found, I
believe: and what is far worse, in Is. lxi. 1. (the formal com-
mission of the Messiah quoted by our blessed Lord) ‘“‘the
Spirit of the Lord God,” for the Lord Gop, which destroys in
this place the prophecy, that the Spirit:of Jehovah 2hould rest
upon Christ.
It seems to be of great moment to preserve with accuracy
an indication of this kind, when the most learned of the Uni-
tarians admit, that JzEHovAH is certainly limited-to express the
Supreme Being atone. (Belsham’s Calm Inquiry, 304, 5). Yet
* That in Ps. cx. 5, for instance, which destroys the application of the fol-
lowing verses of the Psalm to Christ and his sufferings.
+ ‘The force of it (mm) is opened Rev. i. 4, 8; and thus it differeth from
Adonai, or Lord, which is God’s name of his suatentation or dominion, whereas
Jehovah is his name of existence or being.”’—Aimewerth. This negtected non-
conformist, was :the first English scholar who introduced the word Jehovah
into the translation of any considerable part of the Old Testament; which he
did within a very few years of the date of our Authorised Version.
On 139%, Dr. Smith says, when it has the emphatic prefix, M, it is applicable
to God alone; ‘‘So the learned and: minutely indefatigable J. H. Michaelis.”’
But mintite learnimg was hardly requisite in this case; as (though the obser-
vation is valuable) all the passages where it occurs with , appear to be the
following :—Exod. xxiii. 17, xxxiv, 23. Isa. i. 24. iii, 1. x. 16, 33. xix. 4. and
Mal. iii. 1. The last is clearly a prediction of the coming of Christ.
t Also in Oxford folio, 1786.
79
we have thousands of Bibles in circulation without any dis-
tinction whatever between Jehovah and Adonai, and often
with none between Jehovah and Elohim, (I allude in parti-
cular to the editions of the late Mr. Reeves) : the following list
will also show, that zone of our modern Bibles can be relied
upon for preserving these distinctions accurately. I may there-
fore, be permitted perhaps to add that most important use of
them is made, as your Lordship well knows, by Bishop Pearson
on the Creed, and the late Rev. Mr. Jones, of Pluckly, on the
Trinity. Obliterate these distinctions, and there are various
passages which are quoted in proof of our Lord’s divinity, by
these and other writers, whose force cannot be understood ; I
would point to those especially, in which Jehovah, speaking in
the first person, declares he will send or “ save” by Jehovah,
spoken of in the third person, such as Isa. xviii. 16, 17. Hos.
i. 7. Zech. x. 12, &c. These passages have appeared to some
hard students, my Lord, to destroy the last refuges of Socini-
anism in Sabellianism. We grant, with Archbishop Whately,
that ‘ there is no translation of the Bible, (and no ill-trans-
mitted copy of a translation) that is not better than none,
where this is the alternative ;”’ but the Crown and people of
England have largely provided and paid for the perfect pre-
servation of the weighty distinctions in question; and our’s
is not the alternative of a bad translation, though alas! at the
present moment, it is that of a bad copy, of a good translation
—or none.*
My Lord, I must now be permitted to bring together in
* Dryden’s description of darker times, has its application here: blessed be
God, but a partial one; but into the degree that it is applicable, ‘“‘ a knowing
age’’ should ‘‘ inquire,”’ as he afterwards says.
‘* Scripture was scarce, and as the market went,
Poor laymen took salvation on content ;
As needy men take money, good or bad :
God’s word they had not, but the priests they had.
Yet whate’er false conveyances they made,
The lawyer still was certain to be paid.” —~ Religio Laici.
80
what order I can, a few corroborative facts and statements,
pressing, as I conceive, the general importance of my subject.
1. The British and Foreign Bible Society has circulated
upwards of a million copies of the Holy Scriptures in error
on this point—its early church friends in particular, (among
them, according to Dr. Hodgson and Mr. Owen, the vene-
rable Bishop Porteus, your Lordship’s predecessor) united with
the Society in the palpable error—of believing they were circu-
lating, as their fundamental rule is that they will “only’’ cir-
culate, the ©‘ AurHorisED Version.” But they have never
circulated a single copy of the Scriptures that has not con-
tained thousands of intentional departures from that Version.
Their well-meant resolution on the subject, through the unau-
thorised proceedings at the only presses to which they could
apply, having been all along an utter and gross FALLACY.
2. The lessons of the Established Church are read in error,
so far as any of the interpolations or alterations of the text of
the modern Bibles are read; and in the burial service alone,
my Lord, two minor interpolations occur. In 1 John i. 4,
we have an alteration (“‘ our joy” for “ your joy”) of
Dr. Blayney’s, and many modern Bibles, which materially
alters the sense...... Macklin’s beautiful and expensive
Bible, one of the noblest productions of British typography,
I saw the other day deformed with this alteration, and the
gross one (also in Blayney’s Bible), Judg. xi. 7, “ children’
for “elders” of Gilead. Remembering again, that the mar-
ginal readings are an integral part of the Version, and that
Clergymen have an option (which I know they sometimes
use) of reading either the textual or the marginal words—
how, without a change of system, my Lord, is the humble
Curate of a remote Parish to distinguish the authorised from
the unauthorised readings? Sometimes indeed, he has not
this difficulty to complain of; for too many of the large
Church Bibles contain no marginal readings or references
whatever. As in the case of these expensive books economy
can hardly be thought to have been the object, ignorance or
8]
negligence of the Translators’ design is clearly chargeable
somewhere.
3. The country is annually allowing a draw-back, of some
importance to the revenue, on the paper used in printing the
Bibles at the Authorised Presses; a draw-back especially
granted with the view of keeping up a cheap supply of the
Authorised Version :—it has been claimed, however, for above
sixty years, such Version not having been in point of fact sup-
plied, but a professedly “reformed” text, one that in the case of
any other book would make it a distinct property and copyright.
Ts this correct in principle? And may not a parliamentary
inquiry compel a large sum of money thus illegally received
to be returned ?
4. The Scottish King’s Printers, according to Dr. Lee of
Edinburgh,* (a gentleman not unknown, I believe, to your
Lordship) ground a modern information against the book-
sellers of Edinburgh on the circumstance of their privileges
being “ chiefly conferred for the protection of the purity of
the text ;”’ adding, that “ rHey would be certain of a severe
punishment, or even of the entire loss of their patent, if they
were to BETRAY THEIR TRUST by supplying the people of
Scotland with inaccurate editions.’’ Is not this rule appli-
cable to England and Ireland? t
5. I think we shall find every intention of the legislature
in granting these privileges has been, in turn, broken in upon.
Justice Foster concludes his comment on the legal opinion
quoted in my first letter, by saying, that these privileges or
‘‘ powers given are reposed” in those learned bodies “ for
public benefit, and not to be transferred upon lucrative
views to other hands.” Yet Baskerville, an infidel, had only
to pay a large sum to the University of Cambridge for the
# See his ‘‘ Memorial,’ 8vo. (on the state of the Scottish Bibles.)
t Ireland.—The labours of whose authorised Presses have been, to my per-
sonal knowledge, occasionally transferred to the eastern shores of England :
the Printers who, however respectable, that are not suffered to issue a single
New Testament without notes for their own village, having been considered
sufficiently accurate to supply Aer capital and provinces.
G
82
\
liberty to print Ais Bible, and so much per thousand to print
two editions of the Prayer.book, as he states—and was no
further controlled afterwards, as it appears, than any other
Printer ; the London Booksellers have been allowed, as in
1806, to print the Bible at the Press of their own Printer,
Mr. Woodfall, (and very creditably in the circumstances of
the case it was executed) paying an agreed sum per book to
the King’s Printing Office; and a respectable Oxford Book-
seller is an avowed and “ managing partner,”’ at the present
day, in “ the Oxford Bible Press.”* Are not all these in-
stances of “ transferring upon lucrative views’’ their import-
ant “ powers to other hands ?”’
6. Your Lordship is perhaps aware, that a whole edition of
the Bible in some of our- provincial dialects, as the Welsh,
-has been sent back to the Universities as erroneously printed
—by the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge; a step
which, as I am informed, the Bible Society has also found
necessary to take. But when was an instance of this kind
of zeal exhibited with regard to the English Authorised Ver-
sion? I have heard indeed, that on one of these Societies
declining to take more of an inaccurate University edition,
tt was afterwards sold at a cheap price tothe other! If
your Lordship will institute any inquiry into this, in the
Society with which your Lordship’s station connects you,
I will produce the name of my informant.
7. While some learned brethren of mine will be found, [
trust, in the sequel to protest against the unauthorised ttalics
as stumbling-blocks in the way of the unlearned, I have a few
notes of the manner in which they have depreciated our ver-
nacular Version in the eyes of other scholars. Dr. Geddes
objects to them as often “ ill-assorted ekes.” ‘ We should
laugh,” he-says, “ at the man who would thus render Lucian,”
and other classic authors. “ Js é¢ not ridiculous in a Version
of the Bible, to distinguish by italics those necessary and
implied supplements which we so frequently meet with in
our modern Bibles?” [Out of five instances in Genesis,
* See page 110.
83
which he regards as ridiculous, three are not the Translators’
italics.] Was it wise to put weapons into the hands of this
bold adversary of ‘‘.Moses and the law?” In the Classical
Journal, vol. xxxix. p. 229, another writer of ‘ability com-
plains, “The most material and glaring defect in our En-
glish Version is, the introduction of italic words in almost
every verse; as if all these words were interpolated and sur-
reptitious, or additions of the Translators to supply the
defects of the original. While they would appear to main-
tain the integrity of the Hebrew text, they in reality impeach
it as deficient and wanting. The construction of that lan-
guage always directs to the words called elliptical; unless
the rules of such direction be made a principle of trans-
lating, the translation is defective.” Quotations of such
complaints might be multiplied.
Now, my Lord, there are only thirty-two chapters in the
whole Bible, in which the italics have not been interfered
with and added to; (twenty of these are short Psalms,)
and but one chapter in the New Testament; i.e. 1 Tim. iv.
Dr. Lee observes, that in John x. the Translators have but
one supplied word; modern Bibles, seven and nine: John xi.
Trans. NINE; modern Bibles, nineteen.
8. It will be in your Lordship’s recollection, that I ex-
pressed my fears, in the spring of last year, that the Univer-
sities were, and had been for some time, printing the Bible
without any specific standard. Evidence, I understand, has
been given to the Committee of the House of Commons, that
even Dr. Blayney’s Bible has been subjected to correction at
the Clarendon Press: a fact I can in measure corroborate.
Having sent to Mr. Collingwood a few striking departures
(about twenty, I think) from that Bible in the modern ones,
he tells me, that these alterations were made “ on the autho-
rity of MS. corrections of that edition.”” At Cambridge,
your Lordship will find that the Family Bible of Drs. D‘Oyley
and Mant was taken as the standard in the commencement
of my investigations, and “ perhaps seven or eight years”
before. Thus, the last correction seems to be in perpetuo
84
corrected ; and we fasten regularly the anchor of our confi-
dence in the text of Scripture on a floating authority—that
of a secret and irresponsible body of men in temporary pos-
session of the Authorised Presses. ‘Fhe public Authorised
Standard has been abandoned, and NO ONE FIXED AND 8PE-
ciFic STANDARD (even on very important critical matters)
has been substituted in its place.
9. In a loose and careless manner, altogether, has this
precious book been transmitted. Which is the first edition
of the Version, the Universities, its legal custodes, are not
able to inform us; and neither University have kept a
single copy, in modern times, of the successive editions
which they have issued. So that what has been printed by
them for sacred Scripture, can never in this world be ascer-
tained. Why, my Lord, the law provides, that one hundred
hand-bills shall not be issued, on any thing like a public ques-
tion without the Printer filing a copy ; and that a novel shall
not be printed at the Minerva or any other Library, without
a registration of it at Stationers’ Hall, and copies being duly
presented to certain public libraries. Edition after edition,
however, of this all-important volume, the Bisiz, may be
put forth, (the new one printed from the last, or the one
nearest hand) and the precaution of keeping a copy shall not
be thought of! responsibility as to any errors it may contain,
resting in reality No WHERE. I was perfectly astounded to
find last year that of the successive editions of the Bible,
no distinct traces could be found !
10. But would you return, I may be asked, to the obsolete
orthography and its manifold inconsistencies? And are even
critical improvements mever to be made? My reply to the
last question will be found in the language of other and able
men—while an Authorised Version is professedly maintained,
let good faith be kept with the public; it is, as Dr. Clarke
has said, “‘ another” Version in regard to every critical
alteration that is adopted: and I would adhere to it in every
critical point, “ until with equal authority, equal publicity,
and superior learning another can be made.’’ I would not,
85
my Lord, az the pretensions of the King’s Printers and
Universities, I conceive, now do, speak (now SRO)
*‘ CROOKEDLY FOR Gop.” Job xiii. 7. With respect to or-
thography, respectable national usage is followed with our
best authors, and it is left ordinarily to competent printers.
Before the publication of Dr. Johnson’s Dictionary we had
nothing like the standard orthography which that has contri-
buted to fix; as the published Letters of Swift, Addison, and
other classical writers will shew. No scholar will assert
that this is not a widely different matter, generally, from the
criticism of a translation. When it touches on criticism, and
you profess to be printing other men’s works, follow their
decision, I would add :—as, moreover, that our modern Bibles
are not without ¢heir absurdities and school-boy blunders, in
this respect.* |
I quote finally, my Lord, the apology on a similar occasion
of a distinguished present member of the Episcopal body—
«¢ The attention which has been paid to apparent trifles both
in the text itself and the notes—may appear frequently
superfluous; but let no one forget, that accuracy and tmpar-
tialtty are the two great virtues of a critic, and that objects
of no importance in themselves lead not seldom to conse-
quences of the greatest moment.” ¢
And beg, with all deference, to subscribe myself,
My Lorp,
Your Lordship’s most obedient, and
Respectful humble Servant,
T. CURTIS.
. Whe Right Hon. and Right Rev, the Lord Bishop of London, &c. &c.
® As in the unfortunate word fole, occurring but four times in the whole
Bible, but regularly spelt éwo different ways, ever since Dr. Blayney’s time;
i. e. twice in Genesis, fole; and in Zechariah and Matthew, foal. Unlearned
persons if they cannot tell which is right, will conjecture both cannot be.
We have also very frequently borne, for Lorn ; throughly, for thoroughly ; ought
for aught; twined, twice, for twinned ; idle, for idol ; palmerist, (Blayney) for
palma Christi, &c. And why cherubims and seraphims are retained when the
Philistims have been banished, { cannot divine.
{+ Marsh’s Michaelis, v. i. p. 526.
LIST A.
TYPOGRAPHICAL ERRORS,
IN AND SINCE DR. BLAYNEY’S EDITION:
Many of the Editions quoted being still on Sale, especially to the Poor.
C. denotes Editions inthe Writer’s own possession ; all the others he has txspected, except the
Svo. 1804, Oxford, mentioned in the Congregational Magazine, May, 1823.
"Yroruswow exe tysaivovray Aoyev.—PAUL.
C. 8vo. Oxford, 1801. Gen. xi. 29.—The name of Abram’s wife was Sirai,
for “Sarai.”
C. id id. 1810. Gen. xxxiii, 5.—And she said. “ She” inserted,
making (as it may be thought) Rachel the speaker,
instead of Esau.
Num. xxxv. 18.—The murderer shall surely be put
together, for ‘* put to death.”
Deut. xii. 19.—As long as thou livest upon thy earth,
for ** the earth.”
Svo. Lnd. Kg’s Pr.1817. id. id.
C. i2mo. Camb. 1829. id.
C. id. Oaford, 1801.
id. id. 1804.
C. fo. Ozford, Bl. 1769.
id.—é. e. for sixty years uncorrected.
Josh. xiii—Title, Baatim is slain, for *‘ Balaam is
slain.”
id. id. 1804. id. id.— (Shewing that the editions could
not have been separately read by any standard.)
Judges vii. 5.—-The Lord said unto Gilead, for “‘ said
unto Gideon.”
Judges xi. 7.—Children of Gilead, for ‘‘ Elders of
Gilead.” This is in twelve different University
C. id. id. 1801.
C. fo. Ozford, 1769.
(Dr. Blayney’s)
C. to Onsford,
C.
24mo, Lnd. Kg’s.Pr. 1822.
1814.
8vo. id. 1810.
id. id. 1804.
fo. id.
C. 8vo. Oxford, 1801.
C. id. id.
C. 12mo. Camb. 1817.
C. 24mo. id. 1826.
id. 1830.
12mo. 1830.
C 8vo,. Oxford, 1810.
C. 12mo. id. 1820.
C. 8vo. id. 1801.
C. 12mo. Camb. 1829.
C. 12mo. Ozford, 1820.
C. Sve. id. 1770.
8vo. id. 1804.
C. 4to. Lad. Kg’s Pr. 1806.
id. id. 1813.
C. 8vo. Lond, 1823.
87
Bibles to that of Oxford, 1814, shewing it to be an-
uncorrected error of forty-five years. The King’s
Printers in 1806, 4to, also copied it.
2 Sani. ii. 24.—Gath, for ‘‘ Giah.”? (Thirty miles
apart.)
1 Kings viii. 19.—Out of thy ions, for ‘‘ loins.’’
1786. Ps. xviii. 30.—Marg. The word of the Lord is re-
signed, for ‘‘ refined.””
Ps. xviii. 50.—-(David) his apointed, for ‘‘ his
anointed.”
Ps, xxxii. 11.—Be glad in the Lorp, and rejoice,
Lorp, ye righteous—‘‘ Lorp”’ inserted.
Ps. xxxiv. 6.—The Lord hear him, for the ‘ Lord
heard him.”
Ps, xxxiv. 13.—Keep my tongue, for ‘‘ thy tongue
from evil.” .
Ps, xlii. 1.—As the heart, for ‘* As the hart panteth
after the water-brooks.”’
id. id.
id. id.
Both the last two editions sent to the Writer
by a Bookseller within the last year.
Ps, Ixxxvi. 11.—Teach my thy way, for ‘“‘ me thy
way.”
Ps. cxix. 119.— Then puttest away the wicked, for
*¢ Thou.”
Prov. xxvii. 2.—Let another man praise thee, and
to, for ‘‘ and noT thine own mouth.”’
Eccles. v. 11.—When goods are increased, thy, for
“¢ they are increased,”’ &c.
Isa. Ixvi. 9.—Shall I bring to the birth, and not
cease, for ‘* not cause to bring forth.”
isa. lvii. 1. Merciful men are taken away.
omitted.
Jer, xxvii. 3.—Come to Jeremiah, for come to “‘ Je-
rusalem.”’
Ezek. xlvii. 10.—The fishes shall stand upon it, (the
river) for the ‘‘ fishers.’’
id. id.
id. id. Error of seventeen years.
*,* These are the Editions which the Rev. Mr.
Horne 80 much commends, and which he states
the Episcopal Church of North America has re-
solved to consider standards.
f 3 Are’’
C.
C.
12mo. Camb.
id. “id.
fo. Blayney,
fo. id.
fo. Oxford,
Svo. id.
id. id.
id. id.
12mo. id.
id. Camb.
8vo. Ozford,
12mo. Camb.
8vu. Oxford,
id. id.
id. id.
id. id.
8vo. id
Syvo. id.
Svo. id.
6vo. id.
1805.
1819.
1769.
1769.
1786.
1801.
1810.
1810.
88
Hosea vi. 5.—Shewed them, for ‘‘ hewed them by
the prophets.”
id. id. Error of fourteen years.
Jon. iv. 6.—(Marg.) Palmerist, for Palme Crist, or
Christi. Also Oxf. 4to. 1772, 1773, and 1786, fo.
Hag. i.—ZEPHANIAH, for ‘* Haggai,” at the top of
page, no part of which has any thing but Haggai ;
and thus omitting that prophet from the top of
the page altogether.
id. id. Error of seventeen years. This
is page for page with Blayney, and shews the
strange adherence to even his typographical errors.
Zech. vi. 1.—There came forth, for ‘‘ there came
four chariots out ;” destroying the whole sense of
this prophecy.
id. id. Error of nine years.
Zech, xi. 17.—Woe to the idle, for ‘‘ to the idol
shepherd.” A very common error.
Mal. iii. 6.—I change not: therefore, ye sons of
Jacob are ye not, for *‘ ye are not consumed.”
Mal. iv. 2.—Son, for ‘‘ Sun of righteousness,’”’ and
‘* ye’ omitted in last clause, destroying an often
quoted promise of God.
Matt. xiii. 43.—Who hath ears to ear, for ‘ hear.”
Matt. xxii, 28.— Whose wise, for “ whose wife shall
she be!”
Matt. xxiv. 22.—There shall, for ‘‘ there should no
flesh be saved.’”’
id. id. Error of at least nine years.
Matt. xxvi. 62.—What is tt which these against
thee—“* WITNESS,” omitted.
Matt. xxvii. 15.’—Want, for ‘‘ wont to release a
prisoner.”
Mark vii. 14.— 4nd said unto them, for “‘he said,”’
marring the sense of two or three verses, and
copied unfortunately into a large edition of the
Bible with Notes.
Mark xii. 14.—Say unto me, for “unto him,”’ quite
altering the facts narrated.
id. id. Error of nine years.
Luke xiv. 26.—Hate his own wife, for ‘‘ his own
life.’*
8vo.
C. 8vo. Oaford, 1801.
8vo. Lnd. Kg’s Pr. 1817.
C. fo. Ozford, 1786.
C. 8vo. id. 1810.
8vo. Lnd. Kg’s Pr. 1817.
C. 8vo. Oxford, 1801.
C. id. id. 1810.
C. id. id. 1801.
.C. id. id. 1807.
id. . id. 1804,
C. id. id. 1807.
C. id. id. 1807.
C. id. id. 1801.
12mo. Camb. 1829.
C. 8vo. id. 1807,
C. 12mo. Camb. 1805.
id. id. 1819.
C. 8vo. id. 1805-6.
id. Oxford, 1804.
C. id, 1807.
89
Luke xviii. 41.—Lord, that I may receive my fight,
for ‘* my sight.”
Luke xxiii. 44.—There was darkness, for ‘“‘a dark-
ness over all the earth.”
John i. 12.—But as many received him, to them gave
he power, &c. for ‘* But as many as received
him,” &c,
John xiv. 10.— My Father, for ‘‘ the Father.”
John xvii. 25.—Righteous Father, the world hath
known thee, for ‘* hath Not known thee.”
*,* This Edition was sent out by the Bible Society
to a respectable Missionary, who detected the
error, while engaged in translating the Scriptures
into an East Indian dialect.
John xx. 29.— Blessed are they that tary have not
seen, for ‘‘ Blessed are they that have not seen.”’
id. id. Error of nine years.
Acts iv. 17.—-By that it spread, for “ But that i¢
spread,”’ e
Acta xxvi. 21.—The Jews caught met in the temple,
for ‘‘ caught me,’’ &c.
Rom. viii. 14.—The Spirit or God, for ‘‘ the Spirit
of God.”
Rom. xii. 20.—If thine enemy hunger, feed him;
if the thirst, for “‘ if he thirst, give him drink.”
Rom. xvi. 8.—Great Amplias, for ‘‘ greet Amplias,”’
Rom. xvi. 18. — good works, deceive, for ‘* good
words.”
1 Cor. x. 31.—Do all to the glory God— ‘* of’
omitted.
2 Cor. ii. 14.—Maketh manifest the favour, for “the
savour of his knowledge.”
Gal. iv. 29.—Inserts *‘to remain.’’ ‘‘ Persecuted
him that was born after the Spirit—tTo REMAIN
—even 80 it is now.’’ Error fourteen yeurs.
id. id. That is in a different size
and type. Printed for the Bible Society.
*,* These are books still frequently on sale to the
poor.
Gal. v. 17.—Flesh lusteth after the Spirit, for
6 against the Spirit.”
2 Thess. ii. 17.—-Work and work, for ‘‘ word and
work.”
at
r
t
90
C. 4to. Oxford, 1770. 1 Tim. iv. 16.—Take heed to thyself and unto thy
. doctrine, for ‘‘ the doctrine.”
C. 8vo. id. id. id.
*,* Mr. Horne calls this ‘‘ another material error’’
of ‘* many modern editions.’’ It appears to have
been first pointed out by Bishop Horsley.
C.4to. Lnd.Kg’s.Pr.1802. 1 Tim. v. 21.—Discharge thee, for ‘‘ 1 charge thee.”’
C. 8vo. Ozon. 1807. Heb. ix. 14.—Goop Works, for ‘‘ dead works,’’
(vexpew épywy.) ‘* The blood of Christ purge your
conscience from good works.’? The writer has
never met with an equally mischievous perversion
ef scripture abroad in the world, as scripture.
This copy was recently in use by a minister.
8vo. Lud. Kg’s Pr.1817. Heb. xii. 4.—Striving agianst, for ‘‘ againat sin.”
C. 12mo. Camb. 1830. Heb. xiii. 2.— Bet not forgetful, for ‘‘ Be not for-
getfal to entertain strangers.”
id. id. 1 Pet. ii. 16.—A cloke of malicionness, for ‘“ ma-
. liciousness.”’
8vo. Oxon. 1804. 1 Pet. iii. 6.—If you do will, for ‘if you do well.”
C. fo. 1769. 1 John i. 4.—That our joy, for ‘‘ your joy may be
Blayney’s full.’? Traced in twenty editions of various sizes,
C. to Camb. 1824. and by all the authorized Printers, to Cambridge,
12mo. 1824, i.e. Afty-five years.
C. Gvo. Oxon. 180]. Jude v. 16.—These are murderers, for ‘‘ these are
murmurers.”
C. fo. Blayney, 1769. Rev. vii. 14.—Marginal reference: there is one to
chap. iv. 21. There being but eleven verses in
the fourth chapter. The folio edition, 1786, and
even the King’s Printers, 1817, make or copy the
same blunder, i.e. for thirty-one years.
DOUBTFUL.
The following gross error of Dr. Blayney’s, I call pouBTFUL ; for I am not sure
whether it should be regarded as a typographical mistake, or an intentional
alteration.
C. fo. Ozford, Bl. 1769. Rev. xviii. 22, omits entirely these worda, ‘‘ At all
in thee ; and no craftsmen of whatsoever craft he
be, shall be found any more.”
Ato. id. 1769. id. id.
Royal fo. id. 1770. id. id. A Church Bible, without
marginal references or readings. (On sale in
London, July, 1832.)
fo. Oaford, 1772. id. id. A copy in W—— Street
4to. 1772. id. id. Seen on sale, July, 1832,
4to. Lond. 1773. id. id.
91
This is the /argest omission which has been made during the 220 years of
the transmission of our present Version. Mr. Horne is mistaken in attributing
it to “the overrunning the folio edition of 1769, into the 4to. size ;’”’ because
the 4to. according to Dr. Blayney’s own account was printed jfiret, and because
it is in both his editions. It appears also, from Dr. Blayney’s account, that he
twice revised each of his two editions which contains this error.... The writer
has casually come to the knowledge of its being in siz folio and quarto editions
— five of which he has inspected. From previous statements, especially
Mr. Horne’s, he had concluded it was but in one, i.¢. Dr. Blayney’s 4to. It
is probably in several others besides these six—-for here are no sizes but folio
and quarto specified, and no Cambridge edition of any size.
My doubts respecting this being a mere Printer’s error arise thus :—{Two
respectable Printers of the metropolis say, it could not be a typographical error.]
These seventeen words, making nearly two lines, were found in every edition
of the Bible which Dr. Blayney can be thought to have used in sending his
edition to press: for it is not probable that he would take the trouble to
furnish an entire M8. Bible to the Printer. If the Printer left them out, it
would be while “composing,” as it is called; and the omission must have
passed unnoticed in two distinct readings at the Press, designed to eheck such
accidents ; it must also, according to Dr. Blayney’s account, have been passed
by him four times unnoticed. Is ¢his probable?
On the other hand, a fragment of Hippolytus, and an inferior MS. (Cov. ii.)
are quoted by Mill, as omitting the Greek clause exactly corresponding with
these words: and racys rexyns of the clause is omitted in the Codex Alex. and
the Arab. version. I must venture the conjecture, as one nearer approaching
to probability—that Dr. Blayney séruck out these lines from the copy he sent
to Press. But perhaps this copy can be produced.
LIST B.
INTENTIONAL DEPARTURES FROM THE AUTHORISED VERSION :
With some Typographical Errore still continued.
The italie words quoted without remark, are false, or unauthorised italics. The cases marked with
a star, wore examined by the Sub-Committee mentioned in the Postscript.
B. at the end means, introduced by Blayney, so far as lcan ascertain.
*,* It is particularly to be observed, that the errors are stated to be such on the authority of
the Edition (No. 1.) of 1611. It is with that the Modern Bibles are compared; and no
criticism is attempted except in support of that,
“ The (oo-itile learning of tho Friars, [read authorised Printers] and the too-much learning of the
Jesuits, (unauthorised critics] have so wrested the scriptures, that (as Polydore Virgil saith of
the lawyers) they have stretched God’s book as a shoemaker extendeth a boot.”? John Boys’
(one of the Transiators) Sermon on Christmas Day.
The TITLES, of the Old and New Testament, in the modern Bibles,
omit the word ‘‘Newly,’’ before ‘‘ Translated out of the Original Tongues,”’
and ‘ Translated out of the Original Greek,’’ respectively; and substitute
“¢ Command,”’ for ‘‘ Commandment.” The last appears the better word in
this case, ay expressing more fully ‘‘ a mandate given ;’’ and because Command
is never used as a noun in the Bible itaelf. But ‘“‘ Newry’ is important as
expressing the claims of the Translation to originality, or to its having been
made directly from the original Hebrew and Greek; a fact of late denied by
Mr. Bellamy and others. Mr. Todd, in ‘‘ Vindication of our Authorised Trans-
lation and Translators,”’ is obliged to quote the old Title, where ‘‘ Newly
Translated”’ stands In emphatic apposition with ‘‘ Diligently compared.”
In their Dedication, they say, ‘‘ Your Highness—apprehended how conve-
nient it was that out of the Original Sacred Tongues, together with comparing
of the labours, both in our own and many foreign languages, of many worthy
men who went before us, there should be ONE MORE EXACT TRANSLATION Of
the Holy Scriptures into the English Tongue.” It was not merely a revision of
other men’s labour, or a compilation of various Translations before made; but
a Translation ‘‘ Newly made from the Original Tongues by his Majesty King
James’ special commandment.”
93
Marginal Additions,
or Alterations.
* Gen. 1. 9, 10. eveccevccece “The dry land,” twice. In Exod. xiv. 16—29.
four other cases. See also vii, 22. (B.)
27. secescoccees “ God created man in his ownimage.” Gen. v.3.
same phrase left unaltered..... The compari-
son would imply, that Adam’s children were
more in his likeness than he originally was in
God’s. Geddes—‘ After his own image.’ (B.)
V. 24. .cccccccecee “ And he was not, for God touk him.”’
Vi. 4. sevceccccces “* The sons of Gop came in unto the daughters
of men.” Gop, one of the Translators’ signs
for Jehovah, in the original. Many regard
these, (i.e. the Elohim) as only nobles or
powerful men. [Of late corrected.] (B.)
16. secoocccccee © LOwer, second and third stories.’’
Vii, 22. wevseceeevee “* Of all which was in the dry lund.” (23rd v.
was unaltered.) (B.)
xi. 2.+Or, eastward. Text reads “‘ from the East.’”? And the Ararat
range of mountains extended east of Shinar.
‘ Chose to go westward.’ Patrick. ‘ Journeyed
from the East.’ Ainsworth. ‘From their first
- residence.’ Geddes. (B.)
Xiv. 10. seccecseeees “* The vale of Siddim was full of slime-pits.’”
A Hebraism that cannot be otherwise ex-~
pressed, MANS MANS. Heb. “ pits, pits, which
meaneth many.” Ainsworth.
xviii. 27. ........+-0« Lord for Lorp.
xviii. 30—32. ............ Lorp for Lord thrice. [Of late corrected.] (B.)
XX. 7. eccccccssese ‘* Restore the man his wife.” ‘ The wife of the
man.’ Ainsworth. (B1.)
EX. 17. secccccccese ‘ And they bare children.”” 4, to bear a child.
Gesenius.
XXX. 30. secccecceees Lhe Lord, for Lorp. (B.)
Xxxii, 15. sscoccesees. FoOles, for “foals.” As also in xlix. 11. Yet
Zech. ix. 9. and Matt, xxi. 5. we have foal. (B.)
xxxvi. 39. After his A comment violating King James’ sixth direc-
death was an___— tion: —*‘ No marginal notes aT ALL to be
aristocracy. affixed, but only for the explanation of the
Hebrew and Greek words, which cannot with-
out some circumlocution, so briefly and fitly
be expressed in the text.” (Not in Oxford
4to. 1770.)
Xxxix. 1. ,eceecsseeee Bought him of the hands, for ‘‘ hand” of the
Ishmaelites. ‘tp, the ‘hand,’ the common
idiom for power.
94
Marginal Additions,
or Alterations.
Gen. XXxix.16. cecasseeceee Until his lord, for ‘‘ autil her Jord’ ca me home.’
Vulg. ostendit marito revertenti domum. Right
in 1750.
. Bil, 11-34. .....ees0ee6 Five cases of true men, as opposed to spies. (B.)
Xlix. 26. ssccccceccee Blessings of thy father prevailed above the bless-
ings of thy, for ‘‘ my progenitors.” "1M,
‘ progenitores mei.’ Vulg. ‘ My progenitors.’
Ains.’ (B.)
Exod. vi. 2.¢Or, JEnovau. To explain the Lorp. The same word occurring
five times in preceding, and eleven times in
same chapter unexplained. (B.) By distin-
guishing this case, you convey to the unlearned
a false idea’ of the others; indeed of many
more passages—the Lorp being the common
sign of Jehovah. .
vi, 21. ceccceseeee» Lithri (np) for “ Zichri,’’ (53) The former
being mentioned next verse. (B.)
vili. 21—31. ...0.0...... Seven instances of ‘‘ swarms of fies.” any. See
Ps. lxxviii. 45. and cv. 31. for the same phrase
unaltered.
Xii. 36. ...cccecccese “* And they lent nnto them such things as they
required.” ‘Gave them their asking.’ Ains.
‘ Gave whatever they asked.’ Geddes. The five
supplied words are to express the Translators’
understanding of the force of uw; as meaning
not merely to lend, but to lend or give what is
demanded. See Ps. ii. 8. ‘ Shall demand.’ Old
Version. ‘ Postulabit.’ Vulg. Bishop Horsley,
Dr. Clarke, and others, observe, that neither
the words lend nor borrow are applicable here.
‘*The Egyptians were in consternation—they
were urgent upon the Israelites to depart. The
Israelites demanded, as a condition of their
immediate hastened departure, the things men-
tioned.” This solves a “‘ scripture difficulty” of
which infidels have made a considerable use.
XV. 25, cecccecccees ‘* Made for them a statute.” ‘‘ For them’’ in-
serted.
XIX. 12. eocccsseoees “© That ye go not up.” Turning a prohibition
into a strong injunction to go up into the
mount.
xxvi. 17, tHeb. bands, i. e. tenons. (mim, artificial hands.) ‘ Called
for “Shands.” in HebrewAands, for that they held fast in the
mortoises of the sockets.’ Ains. It is ‘hands,’
Lond. 1767. :
.
95
Marginal Additions,
or Alterations.
@
Ex. xxvi. 24. +Heb. twined, i.e. paired. A Hebrew word (pon) only used
for ‘‘ twinned.” here and xxxvi. 29. ‘The Hebrew word sig-
nifieth twins ; declaring that they should be
so perfect and well joined, as were possible.’
Gen. Bib. Our old English verb to twin, is
often used by Shakespeare. See Johnson.
‘ twinned,’ Lond. 1767.
XXXli. 18. ..cccccccces ** Jt 8 not the voice of them that shout for maa-
tery, neither is it the voice of them that cry
for being overcome ; but the noise of them that
sing that I hear.’”’ Eleven italic words, five
only genuine. This verse is instanced by Mr.
Carpenter, as a ‘‘striking’’ example of ‘ our
Translators having encumbered their Version
with a load of useless italics, and often with-
out the slightest necessity.”’—‘ Guide to Read-
ing the Bible,’ p. 57, under ‘ Defects of the
Authorised Version.’
XXXiv. 23. ....cecceeee Befure the Lorp God, the God of Israel, for
‘* the Lord Gop,” &c. (B.)
Lev. ii, 4. ceccceccccs. Unieuvened cakes, for ‘‘ an unleavened cake.”
*
Xxiy.
Deut. xxiv.
xxvi
* xxix
Josh. iii.
10.
Gen. ‘ An unleavened cake.’ Geddes. *‘ An
unleavened cake. The Translators evidently
preferred the sing. (A poor man’s offering.)
iv. 13, 22,27....esee0e. Three cases of ‘‘ somewhat against any of the
commandments of the Lorp, concerning things
which should not be done.”” The sense de-
stroyed. Gesenius quotes the place to prove
the Hebrew word myn, to mean a prohibition.
veevccecesce * Israelitish woman.” An Israelitess. Her fa-
ther being an Egyptian.
17. .cccecsecese Nor take the widow's, for ‘* a widow's” raiment
to pledge.’’
1. .eeeeeerecee The Lorn thy God. ‘‘ Thy God,” inserted.
11.
ix. 29. ....eeeeeee The secret things....things which are revealed.
No other way of expressing either of these.
scceseeseoes The ark of the covenant of the Lorp of all the
earth, for ‘* The ark of the covenant, even the
Lord of all the earth.” The Lorp or in’,
bruught into construction with the earth, and
of substituted for ‘‘ even.” This ‘ even’ ad-
visedly inserted. Patrick quotes three Jewish
writers (D. Kimchi among them) who con-
Joshua iv.
xi.
Marginal Additions,
or Alterations.
96
sider the ark to be here called the Lord of all
the earth, because God ‘‘ was so present with
it, that where the ark was there were won-
ders wrought which ceased in its absence.”
....And they defend this construction criti-
cally. See the preceding verse. So did the
late Mr. Greenfield, of the Bible Society.
6. eeveandtennne “6 Ask their fathers.’’
8. +Burnings, for They were bituminous waters. Geddes. ‘Warm
** Burnings of
waters.”
baths, or salt-pits.’ (B.)
Xiv. 10. .cccccecccce “© While the children of lsrael wandered.’’
Kix, 2...cecnveccee Beersheba, Sheba, and Moladuh, for ‘‘ Beersheba,
(3) or Sheba,” &c. i.e. the same town, and
making the number falling to this family too
many. Geddes shews that the Translators
advisedly rendered the ) ‘‘ or ;’’ and Gen.
_ «xvi, 33. makes it¢ one place. See Patrick.
‘Beersheba, whieh is Sheba.’ ‘ Cerffinly it
is so here,’ Ae says.
XXi. 16. coccceccscee “* And Bethshemesh.”? Mr. Hartwell Horne in-
xxii. 34. SeeeeGanee
stances the italics, iv. 6, and in this last place,
(which have been inserted since their time) to
shew what Hebrew Bible our Translators
used !
-«e Called the altar #d. This name, not in our pre-
sent Hebrew text, is however, in the Syriac,
arab. and Vulg. a proof that our Translators
sometimes ,used these as deciding a reading.
Judg. iii, 31. I¢ seems only All in violation of King James’ direction before
to concern the
country next to
the Philistines.
2. I¢ seems to
concern only
North Israel.
xi. 29. Jephthah seems
xii.
to have been
judge only of
North-East Is-
rael.
8. He seems to
have been only
a civil judge,
&c.
quoted, and intended to establish Usher's
shorter Chronology, first inserted in 1680.
It contradicts expressly Acts xiii. 20. or St.
Paul, Josephus, Michaelis, and the best mo-
dern authorities; making the period of the
book 350 instead of 450 years. These notes
also destroy the continuity of the general
narrative; or the strictly historical cha-
racter of this book, ‘‘ Nothing but a deter-
mined adherence to hypothesis,” says an able
writer, “‘ could have done this. Any person
reading impartially will not fail to discover
that it was one part of the design of the au-
thor or compiler to deduce the history of the
Israelites in a continued series.’’ ‘* The
Marginal A dditions,
or Alterations.,
(Two other succession of one event and of one chieftain
cases in this to another, is frequently expressed in exact
chapter. ] words.”
Judges xiii. 1. This seems a
partial captivity. -
xv. 20. [A similar case.]
° vill. 13. .....-ee000. Returned before the san was up: (or rose).
xxi, 22. +Or, gratify us
in time, for “‘in
them.” (Asking
a favor.)
1 Sam. v. 4. +The fishy, for Only the stump of Dagon, tat pr. Literally,
“‘thefilthypart (perhaps) ‘ the mere Dagon,’ or Dagon part.
of Dagon.”’ Our Translators from their margin seem to
have considered this as an obscene idol. See
Parkhurst in 3°. ;
Xiil. 6. .eocccscccee They werein a straight, (rectified, i. . distreased)
for ‘‘a strait.” (B.)
xxv. 29, +The bow, for An imprecation on enemies. Bought, ‘ a twist,
the bought of link, knot.’ Johnson.
a sling. ‘¢ Many a bought
Of linked sweetness long drawn out.” —MILTON,
A fine word of the language lost. (B.)
2 Sam. xvi. 8. ...seeeeee-. Lou art taken in thy mischief, for ‘‘ to thy mis-
chief,’’ hurt, or ruin.
EX. 19. ....c00+5+02 Lam one of them that are peaceable. One
among others, is the true sense.
1 Kings xiii.11. ¢Son, Heb. His sons came, for ‘‘ his soncame and told him.”
Xvili. 28. ...ceseeee5. “* Cut themselves with knives and lancets,’’ for
lancers, a small spear. ‘ Launcers.’ Gen.
‘ Lanceolis.’ Vulg. ‘ Javelins, short spears.’
Brown. Not the modern surgical instrument.
It was a mode of idolatrous worship. Lac-
tantius describes the Roman priests of Bellona
as running swords through their hands, &c.
1 Chron. xxix. 1. ....-.+.+2 Solomon—whom God alone hath chosen, for
<¢ whom alone God hath chosen.” See xxviii.
5. (B.)
2 Chron. fii. 10. ......e+e.2- In the most holy house, for ‘most holy place,’
he made cherubim. ‘In the sanctuary.’ Geddes.
xxi. 12. +Which was The text reads—‘“ There came a writing to him
writ before from Elijah.’ This explanation must have
his death. been obtained by miracle, if authentic. Who,
in the silence of scripture, shall say when it
was written ?
H
98
Marginal Additions,
or Alterations.
2 Chr. xxvifi. 22. ......0e. Imthe time of Ais distress, for ‘‘ this distress.”
xxxil.
Job i.
xXXxix.
Psalm v.
ix.
XVili.
xlv.
Ixviii.
1xxvi.
® Ixxxvi.
5.
1.
30.
18.
14
47.
7.
2.
5.
8.
See v.20. ‘ This distress.’ Geddes.
ccccccccces. Repaired Millo, for ‘‘ prepared.”
+Moses is And although Job lived an hundred and forty
thought to have years after his calamities, this (B.C. 1520) is
wrote the book the date throughout; either as if the book were
of Job among not to be regarded as a regular portion of his-
the Midianites, tory, or by a blunder.
B.C. 1520.
scececcceees Where the slain are, there is she, for ‘‘ he,’’ i. €.
the male bird. In the Pent. this form of sim,
is the common gender. (Ges.)
Man of blood, i.e. very bloody. (B.)
for bloods—
cccccccceece “* The expectation of the poor shall not perish.”
Turning a negative into a positive assertion.
(B.)
+Cleaveth, for ‘‘ Himself unto thee.’’ Cleaveth himself, non-
leaveth. sense. Leaveth himself, in this connexion, a
fine expression of resignation on the part of
the poor. (B.)
cacccccceces Subdueth the people unto me, for *‘ under me.”
+O God. Addressed to the Messiah. Dishonest orthodoxy.
Dr. P. Smith would not admit this construc-
tion of the original into his first edition of
‘* Scripture Testimony.” In the second, he
has admitted it; but is it fair thus to foist
it into a public Version ?
.eceeoeees es The wicked perish in, for ‘ af the presence of
God.” 1, before or from. (‘ As wax melt-
eth before the fire.”’) B.
cocsccsecccee ** Speak not with a stiff neck.”
coccccosecee “ Neither are there any works like unto thy
works.”
* Ixxxix. 19. .... ....... ‘* I have laid help upon one that is mighty; ex-
alted one chosen.” Destroys the reference to
the Messiah, or indeed to any one person.
CV. 12. ...000-+-.+0 When there, for ‘‘ they were but a few men. (B.)
xxii. 30, to Ixxxvi. 15. ..... Thirty-one cases of Lorp, for Lord ; or this im-
portant name inserted where it is not in the
Hebrew of Vander Hooght, or the Translators’
Bible.
lxviii. cocvccencene Has five cases. (4 B.)
IXEXVi. ..020+...0¢. Has seven. (4 8B.)
Marginal Additions,
or Alterations.
Psalm xevii. 5. ...0-+002000 The Lorp of the whole earth. There are seven
cases of this kind altogether. See the begin-
!
ning of the Letter.
id CK. 5. coscesececes The LORD, for the Lord. Altering the sense of
last three verses, which cannot thus apply to
Christ. (B.)
Prov. X. 25. .sseseseseee “So is the wicked no more.” No more, a
phrase for death, destroyed by separating the
words.
Xix. 20. ..ece- ees Receive instruction that thou mayest be wise in
the, for “‘ thy latter end.”’ wanes, ‘ in tuo
novissimo.’ Vulg. A wide difference — thy
death, the strongest sanction of the command,
is surely meant. (B.)
Eccles. i. 1. .ssecsceeees. The preacher hing of Jerusalem, for ‘in (3)
Jerusalem.” See 12 ver. (B.)
V. 8. coe seocceee “ He that is higher than the highest.’ Destroys
the reference to the Most High.
viii. 17. ..cccceocess “* Yet he shall not find it.” The whole clause
inserted, as we believe it should be; but én-
serted and omitted for fifty years.
x. 20. +°‘ Figure like,’’ Text—‘‘ Curse not the king; no, not in thy}
- inserted after, thought.” (B.) To all J have asked, this is
Orconscience. utterly unintelligible... } suppose, it is meant
to explain the next clause.
Cant. viii. 1. ....cccceses Yea, for ‘* yet I should not be despised.”
Iga. iii. 16—18. .......... Six cases of Loarp, for Lord. Contrary to
iv. 4. Hebrew and Translators’ Bible, and Bishop
xxi. 6, 16. Lowth. (B.)
Iwi. 8. cccccscceece LORD God, for Lord Gop. id. id. (B.)
XV. 2. .cccccccsecce Gone fo Bajith, for “ gone up to Bajith.”” Lowth
restores this. (B.)
* xxxviii. 18. .c0e.s...-00 “* Death can not celebrate thee.’ Again making
a negative a positive assertion. ;
Iii. 6. seeecescoeee Made thee a covenant. ‘‘Thee” inserted. Lowth
omits it.
Ixi. 1, .cccccccceee Spirit of the Lord God, instead of Lord Gop.
Obliterating a prophecy that the Spirit of the
Lorp (mi) should rest upon Christ! (B.)
Reetified since.
Jer, vii. 4. .. ccccececes “* The temple of the Lorn,” thrice in Heb. and
A. Version; only once in Dr. Blayney’s edition.
Since rectified.
EXViii, 12. ..sececccoee “ Jeremiah, the prophet.’ To establish a differ-
ent reading.
100
Marginal Additions,
or Alterations.
Lam. i. 14, 15. .ecccccesees Seven cases of the Lorn, for Lord, contrary to
iii. 31—58. Heb, and Translators’ Bible. (5. B.)
ii, 2. Made totouch, Destroying a fine metaphor. °
for couch.
Ezek. i. 17. ....0-eeee++ They furned not, for “* returned not when they
went.” Lond. 1769. ** turned.” (B.)
XVili, 1. ccccceseccee “* dnd” omitted from first verse (1). The first
word in 161) Bible.
xviii. 25, 29. .....eeceeee LORD, for Lord, twice; Heb. and Trans. (B.)
xxvi. 5, 14. xlvii. 10. .e.soe. Three cases of ‘a place for the spreading of
nets.”
xl. 43. End-iron, for Or, Hand-iron. See Johnson, Skinner, and
Andiron. Minshew.
Dan. i. 12. cecccesscoee Give us pulse, “ us’ inserted.
ili. 18. cceccsecceee Nor worship the, for ‘‘ thy golden image.”
Vii. 25. eecccccceess “Shall speak great words against the Most
High.” Greatly weakening the emphasis of
this prophecy.
ix. 24. ¢ They begin An Exposition of a prophecy, said by Sir Isaac
from the 20th Newton to lay at the foundation of Christi-
of Artaxerxes. nity. There are, at least, three famous opi-
nions on this point. Prideaux and Dr. Hales
directly contradict ¢his, as does Ezra vii. 11. .
apparently.
ix, 25. ||Or, And [the Jews] An unauthorised insertion,
they shall be no more his people,
chap.xi. 17. Or, And the Prince’s
[Messiah’s v. 25.] future people.
ix, 27. ||°‘_dnd upon the ||Substituted for “ With the abominable armies.”
battlements shall (Trans.) which agrees with our Lord’s expo-
be theidols of the sition, ‘“‘ When ye shall see Jerusalem en-
desolation.” compassed with ARMIES.’’
xi. 25—31. ||Upon the de- Contradicting the text ‘‘upon the desolate.”
solation. .
Three cases of ‘‘ Fulfilled’? See also Hos. vii. 7. for a similar comment.
inserted.
xi. 38. Qr, God’s protectors. For protecting deities, or false gods ! !
Hos. ix. 3. tNot into Egypt Flatly contradicting text.
Zech. xi. 2. .....+-se0e. Because the mighty fs spoiled, for ‘‘ Because ali
the mighty are spoiled.”
xiv. 6. tMarg.cccce. A long literal interpretation of a difficult unful-
filled prophecy. (B.)
© Matt. iii. 15. ceccccctcccse ** Suffer it to be sonow.”’ At least, Suffer it, or
me now; agrs giving an exhortative force to
the verb. |
101
Marginal Additions,
or Alterations.
* Matt. iv. 20. wccceccccces “* Left their nets.”” The article ra used for the
possessive pronoun.
vi. 1. fOr, righte- To introduce a new reading objected to by Wetst
ousnese, and Whitby.
3. ccccccccvees “ What thy right hand doth.” Hand inserted.
ad Vili. 3. secccccccecs ‘* Jesus put forth his hand.” Art. for pronoun.
. 20. woscccesccce “* Not where to lay Ais head.” id.
ad IX. 5. seecccccsces “* Thy sins be forgiven thee (cov a: azayrias) as
second verse.
° X. 1. cecccccceess ‘* Called unto him (wpooxadecauevos) his twelve
disciples.”
10. +Gr. a staf’.. Another reading (pa88or) contradicted by the
text, and by Mark vi. 8. which prescribes a
staff.
Xli. 23. wecccccccces ‘* Is not this the Son of David?” NoT inserted.
Campbell reads, ‘‘ Is this,’ observing that pars
is never used in the New Testament to inter-
rogate negatively. The Syriac, Vulgate, and .
most ancient Versions agree. Both express
doubt, but the “‘ not”’ intimates that belief pre -
dominates ; ‘Is this,’ implies disbelief.
ad 31. cecccecesese “* The blasphemy against the Spirit,” rev rvev-
patos BAaodeula, destroying its reference to
the object. (B.)
* xHi1..19. 2. ,eeceseess “ Then cometh the wicked one, (5 rorngos) the
Devil—Satan, in Mark and Luke. See Camp-
bell; obliterating an important assertion of
Satan’s enmity to the gospel. (B.)
23. scovcccesece ** Heareth the word, and understandeth #,’’
Zix. 10. cecccesseees “© The man with his wife.” Article for pronoun.
° XK, 25. wccccsccecce ‘ Jesus called them unto him.” (B.)
° XXiv. 41. sccsccccccee “* Two women shall be grinding. See also Luke
xvii. 35 and 36. .The sex clearly marked in the
original.
xxviii. 19. Or, make dis- i.e. ‘‘ baptizing them.’’ What pretence can be
ciples orChris- alleged for inserting the words ‘ or Christians’
tians of all na- _here, it is difficult to imagine ; unless making
tions. christians by baptism, be meant, in the sense
of regenerating them by baptism, as contended
for by Bishop Mant; and then such an inser-
tion is insidious, Bp. iloy, or (B.) Notin
1770, 4to.
@ Mark ii. 9. sccccecccces “ Thy sins are forgiven thee.”
e ill. 13. ecceccccesee °* Calleth unto him whom he would.” (B.)
102
Marginal Additions,
or Alterations.
® Mark iii. 23. ..cecccccees ‘© And he called them unto him,”’ viii. l and 34;
xviii. 5, 6, 8.
two other cases. (B.)
K. 18. seeccccscccee “* There is none good,’ for ‘‘ there is no man
good, but one, that is, God ;” for 50 years is
. stood thus, or to 166}.
Xiv. 36, ccccvccccece “* Not what I will,” for ‘* Not that I will, but
what thou wilt.’’
Luke vii. 21. ..cccccecces ‘* In the same,’”’ for “In that same hour he
cured many.”’ (B.)
Vili, 40. wecccccccece ‘ And the people gladly received him.’’
Xi. 13. cecccccccece “* Your heavenly Father.”
SZ. sece.sccesee “* Ye enter,” for ‘‘ entered not in yourselves.’’
(B.) Ye have not entered, Campbell.
John vii. 16. ........020. Jesus answered them, and said.” And said,
inserted.
Vili. 6. 2. ccccccee “* ht though he heard them not.” To discard
& reading.
X. 29. -ccccccccces “ My Father which gave them me, and no man
is able to pluck them.” Three new italics.
30. ceescce-coee “ I and my Father are one!” Art. for pronoun.
Kili. 14. cecccccceces “ If I then, your Lord and Master.”
cocccscocece Three cases Of “I am he’’ Exo ey. The Ori-
ental usage seems to require ‘ he.’
3B. ceccconceces “1 find in him no fault at ait’—not even one
fault — Nothing culpable, Campbell—weak-
‘ening an important testimony of his judge
-to the moral character of our Saviour. (B.)
XX. 5, Ll. secccccscces *f Stooping down and looking in.” See Camp-
bell and James i. 25.
* Acts v. 33. Seoeteonsese 6-Cut to the heart.”’ Sawn through, perhaps.
“ They were cut like a. saw,’ Broughton.
‘ Diasecabantur,’ Vulgate.
iii, 25. cecccnccecee “John said, I am not he,” ove ey eyw. On the
pronoun here rests the entire stress of the
denial.
xv. 5. Or, rose up, There is nothing in the eriginal for ‘ said they,”
said they, cer- which alters the whole time and place of the
tain. Narrative. Doddridge combats this in L’En-
fant.
xxi. 38. +Zhie Egyptian Another of the many new comments.
rose, A.D. 55.
xxii. 28. covccacccves * But! was free bern.” Rendering doubtful ali
that this clause means, as a reply to the fore-
going.
Rom. i..2).
iv. 16.
viii, 29.
xi. 23.
xii. 3.
1 Cor. iv. 9
8,
xiii, 3.
xy. 4l.
48.
2 Cer ° viil. 2.
4.
° xi. 26.
32.
xii. 2.
103
Marginal Additions,
or Alterations.
cocvcccccece “* They glorified Aim.not as God.” What a
statement to render doubtful—hypercritically.
svccccocsccee ** Of faith that tt might be. by grace,” wa xara
- Xagiy.
ccccccccoese °* Predestinate ¢o be conformed.”
coccccsssces “If they abide not in unbelief,” for “If they
bide not still,” &c.—* still’ is in Lond. 1767.
ccccccccccce ** Not to think of himself more highly,’’ i. e. not
arrogantly.
. fOr us the last “‘ As it were appointed,’ for “‘ approved to
" ,apesties as = death.”’
ecccccccsess “SFilth of:the earth,” for * filth of the world.” (B)
cccccccccccs ** Beatow all my goods to feed the poor, (xpeopicce)
Depart all my goods into the meat of poor men.
Wichiff.
ccccevcccsss “And ancther glory of the moon. ” ¢ And,’ and
‘ glory’ inserted.
eccccccccces “Such are they also -that are earthy.” * Also,’
ingerted.
+Gr. simpli- :for liberality. No ground appears for the change.
city. The whole subject.is liberality.
covccccocces “Amd take upon us the fellowship;’’ again
rejecting a reading. See Marsh's Michaelis.
sccccececvee * In journeyings, iu perils, &c. Nine dative
cases, hypercritically objected to. All Roman,
Londen, 1767.
accceccccccs ** Kept the city of the Damascenes.” ‘ Of the
Damascenes’ inserted.
wcccwevesece *! About fourteen years,” for ‘ above fourteen
-years ago.” (B.)
AiD. 46. at Lystra Although scripture is wholly silent on the matter,
‘ Gal.: ii. 6. -
pb IG.
iv. 24.
vi.-6.
2.
andthe critic having changed the date as above
in ithe text. The apostle had hitherto, per-
haps, been silent on this great honor which he
received: to alter its date is to lessen the
proof of'his forbearing modesty.
eoccwssvccse ** Of Shose,” for ‘ of these.”
seovewcccvcs 8th for'his, (i.e. Christ’s) holy apostles and
‘prophets.”” (B.)
‘And that‘ye put on the,” for ‘‘ that new man
whieh after God," &c.
-ervevescovces <¢:De. obedient to your masters.”
<6 -{quen,!rinserted. The better MSS. omitting
it.
esvseeneoeceeece
104
Marginal] Additions,
or Alterations.
© Phil. iii. 19. ..ccsceesees “* Whose god is their belly, and whose glory és in
their shame."’
Col. ili. 19 ~22. ..sesccceese “ Husbands love your wives: children obey your
parents : servants obey in all things your mas-
tera.” Three important moral precepts weak-
ened. All cases of the Greek article consi-
dered by the Translators to be used for the
possessive pronoun.
iv. 1. secccccecces ** Masters, give unto your servants.” A similar
case. |
1 Tim, i. 4. wseccosccece “* Rather than godly edifying.” « Godly” in-
serted. ‘ Great edification,’ M‘Knight~-a He-
brew superlative.
‘* Broidered,” for ‘ broided or braided hair.’’
The participle of broide, to braid; an old En-
glish verb used here for plaited. See the
margin.
1 Tim. iv. 13. .cesccccsece “ And the books,” early inserted. (first in 1614.)
* Heb. i. 3. .essecoeeee “* The brightness of his glory,” (avre) “ the
radiance of his glory.’”’ Professor Stuart.
* HH. 17. seeccccescoe “ Things pertaining to God,” ra xgos roy @eor,
*¢ things which pertain to God,” Stuart.
Vil. 24. ceccccecss.. “ But this man becanse he continueth ever.”
® KX. 10. ..ccccccecs. “ Offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for
all.”” (edaraf) ‘ once is not an adequate trans-
lation.’ Dr. J.P. Smith. For all or for ever
REQUIRED. The all-availing sacrifice of the
Redeemer being the subject, and the Jewish
sacrifices and Romish masses, being alike ex-
cluded by the weakened words.
Xi. 29. ...sseeseee, ‘ Through the Red Sea as by dry land.” (Enpas)
See Matt, xxifi, 15.
36. eocccccceves “ Trials of cruel mockings.”’
Kil, 1. weeccceceeee “ Let us run with patience the race,” “‘ unto the
race.” Trans.
ad 10. wecccscccece “ But he for our profit that we might be,” &c. B.
I Pet. v. 13. sescsesceee “ The church that is at Babylon.” Again to reject
a reading found in the Syriac, and admitted as
authentic by the Translators. See the fore-
going Letters.
2 Pet. i. 1. ¢Of our God If one of the new readings supplied by the pre-
and Saviour. sent doctrine of the Greek articte is to be in-
troduced, why not the rest? But the principle
ii. 9, See, ereeree
1 Pet. ili. 1.
ll.
1 John iii. 16.
v. 12.
Jude 8.
® Rey. xii, 13.
105
Marginal Additions,
or Alterations.
of these surreptitious introductions is objected
to. No good cause requires it.
ecccccccccee ‘* In 50th which,” (ev as), at least two being
means,
cccoveccecce “* What manner of persone in all holy conversa-
tion.”’
ecveccsecees “* Love of God because he laid down his life.”
To discard a reading, which implies that Christ
was God. (B.)
escecccceees SON Of God (second time Son occurs) * of God’’
inserted.
concvcccsecs “* Filthy dreamers.”’
coscccscocce “* Brought forth the man child ,;’’ a male.
106
POSTSCRIPT.
“ They have opened the flood-gates of an unbounded, and, as it would often appear, of a licentious
criticism ; have rejected readings and admitted readings, on their own sole authority :—- have
permitted that nibbling of the would-be critic at the sacred text, which like the petty labours of
the mouse jn the fable, may let loose a roaring lion upon us at last." — Printer's Complaynt.
Since the foregoing Letters have been prepared for the
Press, a writer in the public papers has alluded to a London
‘‘ Committee of Divines’’ whom he considers as the authors
of the “ Complaints” alluded to by the Oxford Delegates.
I think it a compliment to have had his Letter attributed
to me in some quarters, but I have no claim to the honor
of being its author, nor knowledge of who may be the
party that justly has that claim. His knowledge of the
fact that such a Committee has been several months in
existence, I suppose him to have obtained in some of
those conversations which have been held by the various
members (and by me certainly very freely) with both the
Established and other Clergymen, and scholars, who have
show nan interest in the questions involved. We all felt,
that sooner or later our papers must come before the public.
—I am otherwise altogether unconnected with the letter of
** Academicus.”’*
This writer is doubtless, however, correct. The ‘‘ Com-
plaints” of an individual were not entitled to the notice of so
distinguished a body as the learned Delegates ; but they would
not slight some names which appear to the first of the fol-
lowing Letters, much less so considerable a number of gentle-
men and ministers making a joint representation.
* Times Newspaper, Tuesday, July 24.
107
It appears then, my Lord, but common fairness to the
public and the case, that an answer to the Complaints having
been put forth by the Delegates, those Complaints themselves
should also now appear. They have, as I conceive, become
a species of sacred public property.
I must add, that Iam further induced to print these Letters
by the singular discrepancy that appears between the judg-
ment of the Committee, and that of the learned Regius Pro-
fessor of Divinity, at Oxford. See the close of my Third
Letter. He solemnly pledges his high literary and profes-
sional “ character’’—that those alterations are of No ImPoRT-
ANCE WHATEVER, upon one portion of which only the Sub-
committee, assisted by Dr. Pye Smith, ‘have pronounced,
that they “ greatly deteriorate” our Vernacular Version ;
§* unnecessarily expose the sacred text to the scoffs of infidels,
and threw.such stumbling-blocks in the way of the unlearned,
as are greatly calculated to perplex-their-minds, and unsettle
their confidence in the text of Scripture.’’
It is-a great satisfaction to me, in the.circumstances of the
ease,'that I can thus close with the testimony of competent
judges, to the aecurtéy of my chief statements; and while it
appears impossible that the discussion should rest at its pre-
sent point, it will have a tendency, I trust, to deliver it from
personalities. J am most happy to retire from it as an indi-
vidual: and can heartily forgive the “snubs” which, in the
language of Archbishop Cranmer, | have certainly received.
*,* Dr. Blayney and his coadjutors are considered, it will
be seen, at the Universities, as having settled the modern text.
He represents himself as having “ reformed” the text qn.a
wide and elaborate review of all that had been before.done.
I do not, therefore, consider it material to inquire into the
exact portion of alterations which he jirsé made; that so
many have been at all made, is my complaint :—but some--of
my learned associates have considered it a great extenuation
108
of his conduct, that many of the italic alterations were made
before his time. Where I have been able, I have, therefore,
in my List B distinguished his alterations.
Perhaps, I should also here notice that there are a few typo-
graphical blunders of the editions of 1611 which have been-
thought by some scholars ‘an obstacle to our returning to
these editions.—I am no advocate for restoring typographical
errors of any kind. Scholars are chiefly wanted for an occa-
sional superintendence of the editions of the Bible, and parti-
cularly om in recovering the standard, to discriminate between
what are typographical errors and what attempted criticism.
The latter, as I have repeatedly said in the pamphlet, I
would exclude; the former, I would correct.—Among the
typographical errors of 1611, I count seven instances of
Lorp for Lord, and one vice versa. The first is retained
(Numb. xiv. 17,) to this day uncorrected. Let it be observed
that our Translators had at least 6500 marks, to make in
printing from the older Versions, on this subject alone: little
therefore, will the considerate reader be surprised at one error
arising from a thousand such marks. But these numerous
cases were already marked for the modern Emendators.
The following CornrEsPONDENCE and ProcEEpINGs will
now then be perfectly intelligible to my readers.
LETTER I.
TO THE REVEREND THE VICE-CHANCELLOR AND THE OTHER
DELEGATES OF THE CLARENDON PRESS, OXFORD.
LONDON, April 2, 1832,
REVEREND Sip,
DrEpty interested as ministers of religion in the state
of our English Bible, we respectfully submit to you the fact, that -
the modern Bibles iseued from the Press of your University, abound.
in deviations from the Authorised Version of King James.
Some of these are clearly typographical errors; others (and itis to these
that our attention has been more particularly directed) are as evidently
- intentional departures frem King James’ Bible with a view to improve
109
the Version. Alterations of the latter class are found to a very serious
amount. One of our number has pointed out, in the book of Genesis
alone, upwards of 800; in the. Psalms 600; in the gospel of St.
Matthew 416; in about a fourth part of the Bible 2931—not in-
cluding minute alterations of the punctuation nor matters of ortho-
graphy. We would particularize instances of discrepancy ; but they
are so obvious on an inspection of any of the editions of 1611 (in
comparison with the more modern editions) that the University, we
are persuaded, must at once perceive the general truth of our state-
ment. We, therefore, are chiefly anxious that the Universities should
return to our only legal Standard text ; are deeply impressed with the
importance of very prompt and efficient measures being adopted to
secure this great object; and earnestly wish to be informed whether
any measures of this nature are contemplated, and of what kind.
As the plea of improvement has been extensively acted upon, we
feel bound to express our opinion of the extreme danger of its unau-
thorised application in this peculiar case. It is well known to have
been, on other occasions, the plea of the most heretical, as it is not
unfrequently that of the most incompetent critics on the Bible. We
recognize as Protestants but one English Authorised Version, and we
respectfully contend for the restoration and protection of this, until
with equal publicity, equal authority, and superior learning another
can be made.
‘Trusting that a matter of so grave concernment to the public, and to
all the Protestant churches of the world who speak our language ; one
also that seems to involve the character of the government of the
country, of the Established Church, and of the Universities for good
faith ; and not slightly connected with the integrity of the English
text of the Bible, and the honor of Almighty God—will be duly
regarded by the proper authorities,
) We have the honor to be,
Rev. Siz,
Your most obedient and most faithful humble Servants,
J. BENNETT, D.D. THOMAS CURTIS. J. PYE SMITH, D.D.
J. BLACKBURN. _‘ |J. FLETCHER, D.D. | J. TOWNLEY, D.D.
GEORGE COLLISON. |E. HENDERSON. R. WINTER, D.D.
F. A. COX, L.L.D.
P.S. An answer may be addressed to the Rev. Dr. Bennett,
Chapter Coffee House, St. Paul's.
110
A letter in the same terms, with the exception of the address
being to the “ Syndics” of the “ University Press’? was sent
by the same Gentlemen to the University of Cambridge.
The replies were as follow :—
| LETTER IL.
THE REV. THE VICE-CHANCELLOR OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
OXFORD TO THE REV. DR. BENNETT.
EXETER COLLEGE, Aprif 4, 1832.
Rev. Sr,
I have the honor of acknowledging the receipt of a
letter signed by yourself and other Gentlemen, concerning our Oxford
Bibles, and of assuring you that it will be attentively considered.
I remain,
Rev. Str,
Your very obedient Servant,
~ I. C. JONES,
The Rev. Dr, Bennett, &c. &e. &c. Vice-Chancelior.
- LETTER III.
MR. PARKER OF OXFORD TO THE REV. DR. BENNETT.
OXFORD, April 6, 1882.
Rav. Sir,
As one of the managing partners of the Oxford Bible
Press, I hasten to inform you, that your letter of the 2nd instant,
addressed to the Vice-Chancellor, has been duly considered.* In
answer to it, I am instructed to furnish you with a copy of a letter
lately sent to the British and Foreign Bible Society, from which I
trust it will appear that we are desirous of printing the Authorised
Version of the Scriptures, as correctly as possible.
Tam,
SIR,
Your obedient Servant, ©
J. PARKER.
COPY OF A LETTER ADDRE®SSED TO THE REV. A. BRANDRAM AND
THE REV. JOSEPH HUGHES, SECRETARIES TO THE BRITISH
AND FOREIGN BIBLE SOCIETY, DATED MARCH 23, 1832.
GENTLEMEN,
Your letter of Feb. 14, addressed to the Delegates of the
Oxford University Press, has been carefully considered. In answer
to it, I am instructed to assure you, that they are fully sensible of
* The reader will observe, this was the day after the Vice-Chancellor’s
promise that these extensive statements should be “ attentively considered.”
lil
the importance of sending forth copies of the Authorised Tranglation
of the Bible correctly. printed ; and that they use. the utmost care and
diligence for that purpose.
They would observe that the early editions of the Bible printed in
the reign of James the First, contain many typographical errors, and
many discrepancies from each other; so that no one of them can, in
point of fact, be assumed as a perfect Standard. .
After various attempts of several learned men to correct such
_ errors, as etther originally existed in the early editions of the Autho-
rised Version of the Bible, or had. been. introduced in subsequent
impressions, the Delegates of the Clarendon Press in the year 1767,
commissioned Dr. Blayney to superintend the publication of an edition,
exhibiting the text in a more correct form than any in which it had
before appeared. Dr. Blayney was assisted in this undertaking by
several distinguished members of the University of Oxford; and his
execution of the task met with general approbation. His edition has
in consequence been taken as the basis of those issued from ‘the
Oxford Press.
Besides correcting the text of the Authorised Version, Dr. Blayney
under the inspection of the distinguished persons already mentioned,
and in conformity with a suggestion of Arehbishop Secker, made
some additions to the marginal readings, references, &c. This part
of his labors having been also favorably received by the public, .the
Delegates of the Oxford Press have printed certain editions of the Bible
with the marginal references, &c. contained in that of Dr. Blayney.
They have not however any objection to print editions of the Bible
without Dr. Blayney’s marginal additions ; in fact, three editions of the
family Bible have been printed at the Oxford Press, containing only the
marginal references of the early editions of the Authorised Version.
With regard to the text, the Delegates after considering the great
incorrectness of the early editions, are of opinion that the text of Dr.
Blayney was formed with much care and judgment ; that it furnishes
on the whole, a very good basis for editions of the Bible, and that the
confidence now generally reposed in it, ought not to be disturbed on
slight grounds.
Iam,
GENTLEMEN,
Your obedient Servant,
J. COLLINGWOOD for J. PARKER.
112
P.S. I should add, that preparation is making at our University
Press, for an exact reprint (but in Roman letter, and the octavo form)
of the folio edition of the Authorised Version, published in 1611, in
- large black letter, preserving its antiquated spelling and typograhical
errors. It is also intended to give the various readings of other early
editions to be printed in the same manner, that the public may be
enabled to compare the book with our Bibles of the last ten years,
and with those which we shall hereafter print.
N.B. We have carefully collated a copy of the above-mentioned
folio edition with our quarto Bible published 1824.
LETTER IV.
THE REV. THE VICE-CHANCELLOR OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CAM-
BRIDGE TO THE REV. DR. BENNETT.
CHRIST’S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE,
April 23, 1832.
GanrLeMeEN, |
Your letter, dated April 2, has received the attentive
consideration of the Syndics of the Press. In answer to it, they
desire me to assure you, that they are fully sensible of the importance
of sending forth editions of the Authorised Version of the Bible cor-
rectly and faithfully printed; and that they use the utmost care and
diligence for this purpose.
With regard to your anxiety that the “ Universities should
return to our only legal Standard text,” and your statement that
you recognize but ‘‘ one English Authorised Version,” the Syndics
beg leave to observe, that the early editions of the Authorised Ver-
sion, printed in the reign of James the First, contain many typo-
graphical errors—and also many discrepancies from each other; so
that no one of them can in point of fact, be assumed as a perfect
Standard. After various attempts of several learned men to correct.
such errors, as either originally existed in the early editions of the
Bible, or had been introduced in subsequent impressions, the Dele-
gates of the Clarendon Press at Oxford, in the year 1767, commis-
sioned Dr. Blayney to superintend the publication of an edition
exhibiting the text in a more correct form than any in which it had
before appeared. Dr. Blayney was assisted in his undertaking by
several distinguished members of the University of Oxford; and the
manner in which he executed his task met with general approbation.
113
His edition has in consequence been taken as the basis of those issued
from the Cambridge Press.
The Syndics feel themselves warranted in speaking with confi-
dence of the general accuracy of the editions which they at present
publish; their attention is anxiously directed to the attainment of
this important object ; and they beg to assure you, that they will
always be ready to correct any particular instances of error that
may be pointed out in the editions which they issue.
I have the honor to be,
GENTLEMEN,
Your most humble Servant,
J. GRAHAM,
Vice. Chancellor.
I must now introduce to the reader some “ Proceedings of
a Committee’? formed of the preceding Gentlemen “ for the
Restoration and Protection of the Authorised Version.”
18, ST. PAUL’S CHURCH YARD, LONDON,
May 1, 1832.
At a meeting of Gentlemen who have signed a Letter to the
Universities, convened for the purpose of taking the answer of the
Universities into consideration.—
Present—the Rev. Dr. Bennett, Dr. Cox, Dr. J. Pye Smith, and
T. Curtis.
It was thought advisable that the Gentlemen who signed the Letter
should become a Committee for the promotion of its objecta ; and
Dr. Sauru being called to the chair, it was resolved,
1. That it appears to this Meeting from the correspondence opened
with the Universities, that they admit and defend the intentional
alterations in the modern Bibles, as compared with the Authorised
Version of King James.
2. That this Meeting feels compelled by a sense of fidelity to the
interests of religion, to declare its entire disapproval of the principle
thus assumed by the Universities ; and must deny that they possess
any right whatever to alter critically the text of the Authorised
Version.
4
y14
3. That this Meeting on these grounds feels it a duty to continue
its efforts for the restoration and protection of the Authorised Version,
and therefore forms itself into a permanent Committee, of which it
requests the Rev. T. Curtis to become Secretary.
(Signed, )
J. P. SMITH, Chairman.
It appears sufficient to add, that a Sub-Committee being
afterwards appointed to verify and report upon the various
collations of the Secretary of the general Commiittee, the fol-
lowing was their Report, received at the Congregational
Library, August 7, 1832. It was forwarded to me in the
_hand-writing of Dr. Henderson, and afterwards signed by
the two other members of the Sub-Committee.
AT GROVE HOUSE, ISLINGTON,
June 13, 1832.
Present—Dr. Bennett, Dr. Cox, and Dr. Henderson, a Sub-Com-
mittee appointed to verify and report upon a collation of various
editions of the Holy Bible, made by the Secretary.— Dr. Smith, though
not of the Sub-Committee, kindly assisting in the investigation, it was
Resolved, 1. That this Committee are perfectly satisfied that an
extensive alteration has been introduced into the text of our Autho-
rised Version, by changing into Italics innumerable words and
phrases, which are not thus expressed in the original editions of King
James’ Bible, printed in 1611.
2. That these alterations so far from being an improvement of our
Vernacular Translation, greatly deteriorate it; inasmuch, as in most
instances, they convey to the reader the idea, that wherever any
words are printed in Italics, there is nothing corresponding to them
in the onginal text: whereas it must at once be obvious to every
person who is competent to judge on the question, that what has
‘been supplied in these instances, was absolutely necessary in order
to give the full force of the Hebrew and Greek idioms ; and conse-
quently, should have been printed in the same characters as the rest
of the text.
3. That those who have made these alterations, have discovered a
great want of critical taste, unnecessarily exposed the sacred text to
the scoffs of infidels, and thrown such stumbling-blocks in the way
of the unlearned, as-are greatly calculated to perplex their minds, and
unsettle their confidence in the text of Scripture.
115
4. That it be recommended to the general Committee, to take such
measures as they shall deem most likely to effect a speedy return to
the Standard text, which has thus wantonly been abandoned ; but
that it is expedient to wait till the reprint of the edition of 1611, now
printing at Oxford, be before the public, ere any further correspon-
dence be entered upon with the Universities,
(Signed, )
E. HENDERSON.
F. A. COX.
J. BENNETT.
At this period (Nov. 1832) nothing further has been
attempted by the Committee.
E. JUSTINS and SON, Printers, 41, Brick Lane, Spitalfelds-
NOTICE.
| The Writer has been much urged to publish the First Eprtion of 1611,
correcting its typographical errors—with Notes; exhibiting, at least, the
chief DiscREPANciEs between this and the Modern Editions of the Bible.
Gentlemen disposed to promote an undertaking of this kind may communicate
with him at Mr. WILSON’s.
Royal Exchange, Dec. 31, 1832.
NEW, USEFUL, AND VALUABLE
BOOKS,
PUBLISHED BY
EFFINGHAM WILSON,
ROYAL EXCHANGE, LONDON,
Bookseller to the Wmperor of all the Russias.
VOYAGES AND TRAVELS.
CALABRIA,
DURING A MILITARY RESIDENCE OF THREE YEARS.
In a Series of Letters..
By A GENERAL OFFICER OF THE FRENCH ARMY.
From the Original MS. In one vol. 8vo.
-In 2 vols. post 8vo. with a Portrait, Price 21s,
TOUR OF A GERMAN PRINCE.
TOUR. IN GERMANY, HOLLAND, AND ENGLAND:
Forming the two concluding volumes of the Tour of a German
Prince. Comprising, Lonpon,—The Nobility, and their Mansions,
&c.—the Ascot, Newmarket, Doncaster, and York Races ;—and
Tour to the North of England, &c.
Also, price 18s. a New Edition of Vols. L. and II.;
Comprising the SOUTHERN and WESTERN PARTS of ENG-:
LAND, WALES, IRELAND, and FRANCE.
‘¢ The Tour of a German Princeis a work of much interest to Englishmen, since it
tells with truth and without ceremony, what an individual capable of judging, really
thinks of our country and its people. The writer, indeed, appears to have carefully
committed to paper the events of every day at its close ; hence the impressions are
most distinct, striking and lively ; v0 graphic and true, indeed, are his pictures,
that we feel as if we were the companions of his Journey, and the partakers
of his adventures.” —Scotsman, 11th January, 1832.
The Work complete in 4 Vols. Price 39s.
SKETCHES OF BUENOS AYRES, CHILI, & PERU.
By SAMUEL HAIGH, Ese.
‘© We recommend the book as an unpretending production, abounding in fair and
impartial observations, in interesting facts, in description of manners faithful, while
they are picturesque.”— Atheneum.
1 Vol. 8vo., with a Map. Price 12s. boards. .
Sketches of Bermuda, or Somers’ Fslands.
With a Map and Plates.
By RICHARD COTTER, R.N.
This is the only separate account of the Bermudas ever published.
In One Vol. 8vo., Price 7s. 6d. in cloth boards.
2 MEDICAL BOOKS.
EMIGRATION TO CANADA.
INQUIRIES OF AN EMIGRANT,
Being the NARRATIVE OF AN ENGLISH FARMER from the
year 1824 to 1830, during which period he traversed the United
States of America and the British Province of Canada, with a view
to settle as an Emigrant; containing Observations on the Manners,
Soil, Climate, and Husbandry of the Americans; with Estimates of
Outfit, Charges of Voyage, and Travelling Expenses, and a compa-
rative Statement of the Advantages offered in the United States and
Canada: thus enabling persons to form a judgment on the propriety
of Emigration.
By JOSEPH PICKERING, :
LATE OF FENNY STRATFORD, BUCKINGHAMSHIRE, AND NOW OF CANADA.
*¢ The author of this little work is neither more nor less than a plain, practical
English farmer. His Narrative is interspersed with a number of amusing incidents
and useful hints, accompanied also with such other remarks as oocasion and circum-
stances seemed to require. There is one quality in this little work which we cannot
but value—and which is, the absenee of all attempt at deception.”—-Farmer’s Journal.
A .New Edition, with correct information on the Soils of the
different Locations, and His Majesty’s Commissioners’ Regulations
for Emigrants. |
MEDICAL BOOKS,
FOR FAMILY AND PROFESSIONAL GSE.
ON INDIGESTION AND COSTIVENESS,
With Hints to both Sexes on the important, safe, and efficacious means
of relieving Diseases of the Digestive Organs by Lavements ; in-
cluding Directions for the selection and use of Apparatuses for their
Administration ; and the best Medicinal Preparations for Intestinal
and other Injections. To which is added, Observations on the mode
of preserving Health and prolonging Life, by Air, Exercise, Sleep,
Clothing, &e.; including many useful Family Prescriptions. The
whole illustrated by Wood Engravings.
By EDWARD JUKES, SurcGeon,
Inventor of the Stomach Pump.
Second Edition, with considerable Additions and Extra Plates.
Price 5s. cloth boards.
*¢ My. Jukes deserves well of society for the information he has given in this book.
He is both an ingenious mechanic, anda man of sound professional abilities.”
Metropolitan.
ELLIOTT’S MEDICAL POCKET-BOOK,
Containing a short but plain Account of
THE SYMPTOMS AND TREATMENT OF DISEASES,
With the Properties and Doses of the principal Substances used
medicinally. Including the History, Mode of Preparation, Form
and Doses of the New Medicines, &c: The whole carefully revised,
improved, and augmented.
By.A MEDICAL PRACTITIONER,
Of ‘St. Thomas's and Guy's Hospitals.
A New Edition, Royal. 18mo., Price 5s. in cloth boards, or bound
as a Pocket Book, with tuck, blank leaves, and Pencil, 7s. 6d.
MEDICAL BOOKS. .3
a a er
. A FAMILIAR
TREATISE ON NERVOUS AFFECTIONS,
Disorders of the Head and Chest, Stomach and Bowels, &c.
Also on the Means of repairing a Debilitated Constitution, through
the Establishment of a Healthy Digestion; including Prescriptions
in plain English, from the Writings and Private Practice of eminent
Physicians.
By J. STEVENSON, M.D.
Author af The History and Treatment of Coughs, Colds, and other Winter
Complaints, §c.
«« Dr. Stevenson's Work. upon Nervous Affvetions merits the attention of ali prudent
people.”—Gentleman’e Magasine.
Third Edition, Royal 18mo., Price 3s. 6d. boards.
Influence of Climate on the Constitution.
THE
HISTORY AND TREATMENT OF COEDS AND COUGHS,
An Epitome of Precepts on Diet for Elderly People, &c. &c.
With Directions for the Management of Colds,—Regulation of the
Sick Room,—The Selection and Use of Aperient and other Medi-
cines, &c. &c.
“* This is ‘another work, BY THE SAME AUTHOR, also intended for popular use,
and contains a great deal of very useful and instructive matter, which it would be
well if every one knew something about.”—Gentleman’s Magazine.
Royal 18mo., Price. 8s. boards.
SIMPLICITY OF HEALTH.
EXEMPLIFIED By HORTATOR.
The main object of this Treatise is, the Preservation of Health, inde-
pendent of Medicine, as far as is consistent with prudence and
safety ; and the best criterion of its merit is, the important fact, that
Mr. ABERNETHY has given it a favourable character, which is inserted
in the Work by his permission.
«‘ This is a very nseful manual to be in every one’s hands, There is great good sense
in the advice it offers, so interesting and momentous to all readers. Its contents are
divided into four hundred and thirty-three sections, and are rendered as clear as pog-
sible, so that the meanest capacity may readily profit by them. It may farther be a@-
ded in its favor, that it has obtained the special approbation of Mr. ABERNETHY. It
is, in short, a work of most extended usefulness, equally free from medical mysti-
cism.on the one hand, and the imposition and cant of quackery on the other. We oan
safely recommend it even to hypochondriacal readers.”—New Monthly Magasine.
Seeond Edition, One Vol. 12mo., Price 6s.
HEALTH WITHOUT PHYSIC,
OR
CORDIALS FOR YOUTH, MANHOOD, AND OLD. AGE:
Including Maxims Medical, Moral, and Facetious, for the Prevention
of Disease, and the attainment of along and vigorous Life.
By AN OLD PHYSICIAN.
With a beautiful Emblematical Frontispiece, designed by Richter,
«* Numerous as have been, of late, the publications on medical subjects, written in
a popular style, and for. the instruction of non-medigal persons, we: question much
whether any of them have had an object of greater utility to.accomplish it than the -
ptesent.—-— Wd have marked so many passages in this sensible.and pleasing volume |
for extract, that we are now actually at a loss which to select.”-—Morning Adegrtiser.
In One Vol. 12mo., Pyiee 7s. 6d.
aa
A
~ :
=
mem
4 TRADE AND COMMERCE.
** Good Teeth, independent of their great utility, are essential to Female Beauty.”
ECONOMY OF THE TEETH, GUMS, AND INTERIOR
. OF THE MOUTH,
INCLUDING THE
Medical, Mechanical, and Moral Treatment of the most frequent
Diseases and Accidents incidental to the Structure and Functions of
those delicate Parts, with the Means of correcting and purifying a
tainted or unpleasant Breath, or other Personal or Atmospherical
Effluvia arising from Local or Constitutional Causes or Injuries.
By AN OLD ARMY SURGEON.
‘¢ In your person you should be accurately clean; and your teeth should be super-
latively so;—a dirty mouth has real ill consequences to the owner, for it infallibly
causes the decay, as well as the intolerable pain, of the teeth.” —Chesterfield.
‘** This little work displays considerable knowledge and judgement. Having been
sufferers from tooth-ache, we have been induced to try some of the author’s receipts
for that ‘‘ hell o’ a’ diseases,” as Burns emphatically terms it; and we have no hesi-
tation in pronouncing them superior to any that we have yet met with. We par-
ticularly recommend to the attention of our readers those chapters which speak of
the danger to be apprehended from the use of powerful acids, and other corrosive
liquids; they contain a salutary caution to all those who are afflicted with this horri-
ble complaint. This work is published at a price that renders it available to all
classes.” ——Qlio.
In a neat Pocket Volume, with a Frontispiece, Price 4s..
‘* Delicate Hands and Handsome Feet are indispensable to Female Beauty.”
Also, by the same Author,
ECONOMY OF THE HANDS, FEET, FINGERS,
AND TOES;
WHICH INCLUDES THE
PREVENTION, TREATMENT, AND CURE OF CORNS, BUN-
NIONS, AND DEFORMED NAILS,
The Removal of Exereseences, superfluous Hairs, Freckles, Pimples»
Blotches, and other cutaneous Eruptions; with safe and certain.
methods of rendering the Skin white, soft, and delicate, without detri-
ment to health. :
‘* We should grudge the room which is occupied by this very copious title-page,
were it not that it so clearly indicates the nature and object of the book, as to render
almost superfluous, whatever we might be disposed to advance respecting its contents,
which we have no doubt will, in many instances, prove eminently serviceable; in fact,
the best evidence that we can offer of our approval is, that we have already set apart:
two or three of its recipes for our Mélanges of the month.”—La Beile Assemblée. -
Third Edition, corrected and enlarged, in a neat Pocket Volume,
royal 18mo., with a Frontispiece, Price 4s.
TRADE AND COMMERCE.
NEW CAMBIST.
MANUAL OF FOREIGN EXCHANGES, .
In.the direct, indirect, and cross operations of Bills of Exchange and
Bullion ; including an extensive Investigation of the Arbitrations of
Exchange, according to the practice of the first British and Foreign
Houses, with numerous Formule and Tables of the Weights and Mea-
sures of other Countries, compared with the Imperial Standards.
| By WILLIAM TATE.
‘* This Manual ought to have a place in every Merchant’s Counting-house, and in
every Scliool where Youth is educated for mercantile pursuits. Theauthor is a man -
of undoubted ability, and has been employed, we understand, to make the Bullion -
Calculations for the RovaL Minr.”—Mercantile Journal.
In One Volume, 8vo. Price 8s. cloth.
-
- TRADE AND COMMERCE. 5
A FAMILIAR COMPENDIUM OF
‘THE LAW OF DEBTOR AND CREDITOR:
COMPRISING
The whole of the Bankrupt Laws, with the Alterations and Amend-
ments recently enacted by the Legislature ; the whole. of the Consoli-
. dated Laws, as now in operation, relating to lnsoLvent Desrors,
-with Forms, &c.—Arrangements between Debtor and Creditor, in-
cluding Compositions and Deeds of Trust—the Law of Arrest on
_Mesne Process—the Law relating to Property entrusted to Factors
or Agents—the recent Act, confirming the Statute of Limitations,
and regulating the Law concerning Representations of Character, &c.
—and Lorp Broucsam’s New Bankruptcy Court Act.
With the New Bankrupt Court Rules, the New Rules of the
Courts of Law, and a Copious Index.
By JOHN H. BRADY, ©
Author of ‘‘ Plain Instructions to Executors and Administrators,” §c. &c.
‘This exposition of the bankrupt laws will be found of general utility.”—
‘Sunday Times
Price 5s.
THE LONDON COMMERCIAL DICTIONARY,
AND SEA-PORT GAZETTEER,
Exhibiting a clear and.comprehensive View of the Productions,
Manufactures, and Commerce of all Nations ; the various Moneys,
Weights, and Measures, and the proportion of each to those of Eng-
land ; a description of all Articles of Merchandize, with their Marks
of Excellency and Names in every European Language.
By WILLIAM ANDERSON.
A NEw EDITION,
Containing the Import and Export Duties and Drawbacks, com-
mencing on the 5th of July, 1826; and an Abstract of all the Acts
relating to Finance, Commerce, and Navigation, passed in each
Session of Parliament, since 1823.
In One large 8vo. Volume, Price 21s. boards.
A PRACTICAL TREATISE ON BANKING;
CONTAINING
AN ACCOUNT OF THE LONDON AND COUNTRY BANKS,
Their System of Book-keeping, Terms of doing Business, Method of
making Calculations, and their Customs in regard to Bills of Ex-
change. Also a View of the Joint Stock Banks, and the Branch
Banks of the Bank of England, Banks of Scotland and Ireland.
By WILLIAM GILBART,
Manager of the Kilkenny Provincial Bank of Ireiand.
.Second Edition, Price 3s.
PUBLIC FUNDS,
INFORMATION on Marrers connected with the TRANSAC-
TIONS of Business in the Pustic Funps; chiefly intended to
facilitate Correspondence between Parties in the Country and their
London Agents. By A BANKER’S CLERK. Price 2s. 6d.
6 TRADE AND COMMERCE.
Seen egg ee TTT TS OSA
ROOK-KEEPING.
A NEW CHECK JOURNAL,
UPON THE PRINCIPLE OF DOUBLE ENTRY.
Which exhibits a continued, systematic, and self-verifying Record of
Accounts of Individual and Partnership Concerns, and shews, at one
view, the real state of a Merchant's or Trader’s Affairs, by a Single
Book only, even should a Ledger not have been kept. The whole
familiarly explained, and forming a complete and Practicat System
‘or Boox-Krepine by Single and Double Entry. To which is ap-
pended, a New and more Simple Method, or Double Entry by Single.
By GEORGE JACKSON,
ACCOUNTANT.
Corrected, Enlarged, and greatly Improved; with copious Illustrations
I - Accounts, Toind Adventures, and Joint P: . e
¢ If simplicity, brevity, and clearness, may be esteemed important to the accurate
record of commercial eecounts, this work of Mr. Jackson’s will be found a valuable
assistant to all men of business. It places all matters connected with the mereantile
world in such a plain light, that the confusion attendant upon irregularity or ignorance
may be avoided and-prevented by a mere mechanical observance of the system he
lays down. His plan is practical and conclusive, and the improvements he suggests
upon the works of his predecessors are the evident results of long experience and
eonsideration.” —-Atias. ;
Fourth Edition, in One Vol. 8vo., Price 6s.
TO BANKERS, MERCHANTS, AND TRADESMEN.
TABLES OF INTEREST,
On a NEw Putian,
By which the Interest of any Sum, consecutively from One Pound
to a Thousand, from One to Three Hundred and Sixty-five Days,
will be found at one View, without the trouble or risk of Additions.
Also, the Fractional Parts of a Pound, and from One to Ten Thou-
sand Pounds, at Five per Cent.
Fo which is added, a separate Supplement, that renders these
Fables equally applicable to any other Rate per Cent.
By DAVID BOOTH.
* I have examined ‘ Mr. Booth’s Interest Tables;’ the arrangement is novel and
perspicuous; and I have no hesitation in affirming, that the work will be far more
useful to the public than any one which has hitherto appeared on the subject.
** CHARLES CARTWRIGHT,
Accountant-General tothe East India Company.”
In 4to. Price 1¢. 16s. boards.
THE MERCHANT’S AND TRADESMAN’S ASSISTANT,
AND
Completest Meadp Reckoner.
Being Tables for Business in general, on a New Plan, shewing, with
facility, the Value of any number of Articles at any Price, from
One Farthing to Twenty Shillings; Dividends on Bankrupt Estates,
at any Rate in the Pound ; Parts of an Ounce of Gold, or Silver, at
any Price per Ounce ; any Number of Pounds Weight, at any price
per cwt. ; also the Number of Grosses, or Thousands, in the Weight
of any Aftticle so counted.
By DAVID BOOTH.
In One Volume &vo., Price 68.
LANGUAGES AND EDUCATION, 7
nce ee pean a eT A Ly gy
‘ AN ESSAY ON AVERAGE,
AND ON OTHER SUBJECTS CONNECTED WITH THE CONTRACT OF
MARINE INSURANCE AND ARBITRATION.
By ROBERT STEVENS, or Luoyp’s.
‘* This work is the standard for determining A verage in all the Marine Insurance
Establishments in the Kingdom.”
Fourth Edition, in One Vol. 8vo., Price 12s. boards.
THE MEASURING COMPANION ;
Embracing Systems of Measuring, as established for the Tonnage of
Ships, and Cubical Contents of Timber and Spars; with Illustrative
Diagrams, &c. Also a Series of Tables, containing various Useful
Calculations, all of which are particularly interesting to the Mercan-
tile World, and those engaged in Shipping, &c.
By FRANCIS CHATEIELD. ,
‘‘ Mr. Chatfield has here presented to us a publication which cannot fail to be ex-
tremely useful to every commercial man, but more especially to those at all connected
with Shipping and Ship-Building.”—Pubtic Ledger.
In Royal 8vo. price 8s. bds.
CHINA TRADE.
The FOREIGN TRADE of CHINA, divested of Monopocy,
Restriction, and Hazarp; by means of Insular Commercial
Stations.
Price 3s.
LANGUAGES AND EDUCATION.
PPOPSO
FRENCH.
——iiP—
LE TRADUCTEUR;
Or, HISTORICAL, DRAMATIC, AND MISCELLANEOUS
SELECTIONS,
From the best French Writers, on a plan calculated to render readin
and translation peculiarly serviceable in acquiring the Speaking and.
Writing of the French Language; aceompanied by Explanatory
Notes, a Selection of Idioms, and concise Tables of the: Parts of
Speech, and of Verbs.
By P. F. MERLET,
Teacher of the French Language at the University of London..
In this Edition, the author has made every improvement in the selection of Pieces,
as well as the EXPLANATORY Norss, (both of which have been considerably increased,) .
whieh constant practice in teaching could suggest. ‘
*¢ We pretend to judge somewhat more accurately of the quality of this work than
most of our neighbours; and we have no hesitation in recording our opinien to be,
that it has deservedly reached a Second Edition, and that it ought to go through many
more. It is decidedly the best work of the kind with which we have yet met, and
ought to be in the hands of every one who is desirous of beeoming acquainted with
the structure, the idioms, and the niceties, of the French language.”-—Morning
Advertiser. ;
*¢ The author has been careful te select such pieces only as are instructive and
entertaining, and may be placed, without reserve, in the hands. of youth of both:
sexes ;—to embrace every possible variety in word, phrase, or sentenee; and: to afford
a ready exemplification of the rules of grammar, by appropriate remarks and nume-
rous notes on those peculiarities which form the most difficult parts of the French:
language.” —Gentieman’s Magasine..
** A judicious, instruetive, and entertaining selection, free from every immoral. or
irreligious thought or expression which the French language eontains.—Literary.
Panorama.
Second Edition, much improved,. Price 5s. 6d. handsomely bound.
PEDO PP LPDE FODPPLOD
8 LANGUAGES’ AND EDUCATION:
a on
Also .in the Press,
LE TRADUCTEUR,
VOL. IT.
Comprising the higher parts of Literature,-and the elegant Writings of
- the present day.
A FRENCH GRAMMAR,
Divided into Four Parts.
The Pronunciation; the Accidence; the Syntax; and the Appendix. -
By P. F. MERLET,
Teacher of the French Language at the University of London.
** All the rules we find arranged in this Grammar with the utmost simplicity and
perspicuity, none occupying more than two lines, and arranged in su convenient a
manner as to render references very easy. At the same time every rule is illustrated by
a number of plain practical sentences, such as are wanted in the common intercourse
of life, and are made familiar by exercises of a similar kind. The Tables of Declen-
sions and Conjugations are also admirably clear. It is almost impossible to represent
sound to the eye; yet the rules of Pronunciation laid down in this book are so sys-
tematic and- precise as to render them a great help to those who have had some oral
instruction. The Appendix, or a ‘ Dictionary of Difficulties,’ which Also sells sepa-
rately, will be found an excellent book of reference to the more advanced student,
more useful than French works of this kind, as it is evidently the work of a man who,
by long practice,has made himself fully acquainted with all those points in his lan-
guage which offer difficulties to the English learner.”— Monthly Review.
In One thick Vol. 12mo., Price 10s. boards, or 10s. 6d. bound.
The sepurate Parts may be had at the following Prices :
Part I.—TreatisE on Frenco Pronunciation. Price 2s. 6d.
bound.
Part [I.—Tue Accipence. -Second Edition. Offering tabular
views of all the Parts of Speech in the French Language, -with
brief and simple Explanations, Examples, and: easy Exercises
oneach. Price 3s. bound.
Part 11].—Tse Syntax. Containing the most necessary Rules,
- clearly and concisely explained. Price 3s. 6d. bound.
N..B. These Three Parts form a complete Grammar, bound in one vol. price 8s.
Part 1V.—Tue Appenpnix; or Dictionary of Difficulties, Idioms,
Synonimes, and Niceties of the French Language. Price 3s. 6d.
bound.
SYNOPSIS OF THE FRENCH LANGUAGE.
By P. F. MERLET,
Teacher of the French Language in the University of London.
- 1 @® To those who have already gone through the French Grammar, this little work
- will be of infinite service, as it will enable thei, at one view, to refresh their memory,
by means of Tables representing the verbs, and the most essential rules concisely
expressed, and each accompanied by.an example, so arranged as to make the whole
a Tabular View of French Grammar. ;
12mo., Price 2s.6d. bound in cloth.
*" Such is the confidence of the Publisher in the decided superiority of
the Works of PROFESSOR MERLET, which have already been adopted
at the University of London, and: many of the most rspectable Semi-
navies of Education, that he offers to the Heads of Sehools and to
Teuchers, who may become purchasers of them, to return the money for any
of which they may not approve.
LANGUAGES AND EDUCATION. “9
Pr aes
UTILITY OF ‘LATIN DISCUSSED,
For the Consideration of Parents, or those who have Influence in the
Choice or Direction of Juvenile Education.
In this little treatise, the important subject of classical utility is placed in an origi-
nal and highly interesting point of view, and entirely free from the prejudices that
are usually brought in aid of such discussions. °
By JUSTIN BRENAN,
Author of ‘* Composition and Punctuation,” &c.
‘* «© We are happy in having another opportunity of complimenting the author of
‘ Composition and Punctuation,’ on a work which, unlike many of the present day,
contains multum in parvo, in which, in short, good sense and practical utility, are in
un immense ratio to its elze and page.” —Edinburgh Literary Journal.
Price 2s. boards.
THE FOREIGNER’S ENGLISH CONJU GATOR ;
By JUSTIN BRENAN,
Author of ‘‘ Composition and Punctuation,” §c.
No fewer than seven different Languages, exclusive of English, are
here put in requisition, to illustrate our Conjugators, but most par-
ticularly sHALL and WILL, with their derivatives, SHoULD and WOULD,
which have hitherto proved such stumbling Dlocks to the Foreigner.
It is presumed that this work will much encourage strangers to learn
our language, as its chief difficulties are now explained in that clear
and familiar manner, for which the author is so distinguished.
** Mr. Brenan has conferred an obligation on foreigners and on Englishmen, by the
devotion of so much time to this subject, and by the agreeable manner in which he
has communicated the knowledge he has attained. This work is abundantly useful,
as it points out the misuse of the ‘ conjugators;’ the difference between our ‘ SHALL ’”
and ‘ WILL,’ and the German ‘SOLLEN’ and ‘ WOLLEN,’ is clearly proved. There
are some Latin, some Italian, some Spanish, and a few Danish and Swedish illustra-
tions; we would they had been more abundant, as they are curious.”—Atias. :
Ini Vol. 12mo. Price 4s. 6d. boards.
‘COMPOSITION AND PUNCTUATION
SFamiliarly Erplained,
FOR THOSE WHO HAVE NEGLECTED THE: STUDY OF GRAMMAR.
This popular work is now re-produced with very important attractions. Not only
is every article revised with great attention, but so much has been added, that the
present edition may be considered as almost a new work.
By JUSTIN BRENAN,
Author of “‘ The Foreigner’s English Conjugator,” §c.
‘* We have read this little book with much satisfaction. Something of the. kind
has been long wanted, and the want is now very ingeniously supplied. ‘ My object,’
says the author, ‘ is to instruct those who know how to read and write, but who
are unacquainted with grammar. I propose, strange as it may appear, to show such
persons how they may compose sentences, of which they may not at least be ashamed,
and how they may express their meaning intelligibly, without exelting a laugh at their
expense.’ This object Mr. BRENAN has attained in a simple and agreeable manner,
and we, therefore, confidently recommend his book to those whose early education
has been neglected, and who are now afraid to enter upon all the difficulties of gram-
mar. We shall ourselves present copies of it to several mechanics and others, in whose
progress we take an interest.”—-_Edinburgh Literary Journal.
Third Edition, considerably augmented, 18mo. Price 4s. boards.
10 LANGUAGES AND EDUCATION.
THE PHENOMENA OF NATURE,
Familiarly Explained.
A Book for Parents and Instructors, and especially adapted to
Schools. .
Translated from the German of WILHELM VON TURK.
«¢ ts object is to bring before the young pupil, in a familiar manner, the different
phenomena of nature. It presents a variety of subjects for the child’s consideration,
the knowledge of which is useful, and besides admirably calculated to draw out his
powers of observation-”—Journal of Education, No I.
‘* This is the best and most practical fesson.book on Nature, in the language. We
strongly recommend its introduction into schools, and all places of education, public
and private. We would have the work made a school-room companion for three or
four years, between the ages of eight and twelve, and, in the course of that time,
mastered from end to end by the pupil.” —Speetator, 3d March, 1832.
Price 4s. 6d. cloth.
PRINCIPLES OF PUNCTUATION :
OR, THE ART OF POINTING FAMILIARIZED.
Composed for the Use of Seminaries of Education, and for all who
aspire to accuracy in Composition.
By CECIL HARTLEY, M.A.
18mo. Price 3s. bound.
RHYMES FOR YOUTHFUL HISTORIANS,
DESIGNED TO ASSIST THE MEMORY IN RETAINING THE MOST IMPORTANT EVENTS
In ANCIENT AND MODERN History;
, With Thirty-three Portraits of Kings of England.
‘* You must not laugh at this, for Chronologists do not pique themselves on their
poetry ; they make use of numbers and rhymes merely as assistants to memory, being
#0 easily learned by heart.”—Mrs. Chapone.
Second Edition, Price 1s.
CHRISTIAN EDUCATION,
IN SPIRIT AND IN TRUTH,
Lhe Forerunner of a New Day.
In a Course of Lectures, delivered in London.
By DR. BIBER.
*¢ The great complaints brought forward by Dr. Biber against the modern System
of Education are, that it has no moral object in view; that it is merely a worldly
Education, having reference to the ‘things of this world’ only, and in but few
respects calculated either to increase the happiness of the individual here, or to fit
him for enjoyment hereafter; his Lectures are characterised throughout by great
eloquence of style and much shrewd observation, and we shall indeed be greatly mis-
taken, if they are not as extensively read as they deserve to be most maturely con-
sidered .”—~ FVeekly Free Press.
In One Vol. 8vo., Price 7s. 6d.
Blue Coat School,
With a correct List of the Governors, ( for which alone Onz Guinea is
charged at the School,) and the Mode of obtaining Presentation.
A BRIEF HISTORY OF CHRIST’S HOSPITAL IN
LONDON,
-¥ROM ITS FOUNDATION TO THE PRESENT TIME,
With a View of the New Hall, &c-
‘* This entertaining little volume is the production of a grateful scholar of this
mhatchless and most extensively useful foundation. Every species of information that
ean reasonably be desired will be found in Mr. Wilson’s History.”—Gentleman’s Mag.
Fifth Edition, in 12mo., Price 5s. boards.
LANGUAGES AND EDUCATION. 1f
FOR THE USE OF FAMILIES AND SCHOOLS.
. A FAMILIAR
Analysis of the Calendar of the Church of Bnaglans,
AND PERPETUAL GUIDE TO THE ALMANAC;
In the form of Question and Answer:
Illustrated with a variety of Anécdotes, and Descriptive Sketches of
the Origin of Popular Customs at particular periods of the Year, and
authenticated by references to Scriptural and other Authorities.
Br THE REV. HUGH F. MARTYNDALE, A.M.
*¢ This book is useful, as well ‘as amusing, ahd will form a very convenient object
of reference in families respecting topics of interest, which one time or other must
come under their consideration.”—Monthly Review.
Price 5s. 6d. neatly bound.
A SUITABLE PRESENT FOR YOUTHS,
TALES OF OTHER DAYS.
ILLUSTRATIVE OF HISTORY:
By J. Y¥. A.
WITH ENGRAWVINGS, AFTER DESIGNS BY
GEORGE CRUIKSEANE. |
*¢ This is one of the most. attractive.-publicoations.we have lately seen; it consists
of a series of remarkably well-written and interesting Tales of the olden time, with
Illustrations by Geotge Cruikeshark. Of these Thisttatione it. is scarcely possible
to speak in any other than terms of unqualified praise—they combine so much of
the ludicrous and the terrible, and ate so completely:in Cruikshank’s best style, that
we feel justified in expressing an opinion that this publication will even add to
that unrivalled artist’s-fame. The-volume is altogether well got up—the printing is
remarkably neat, and the Tales are of a pleasingly varied character.” Weekly Dispatch.
See also Literary Gazette, Atheneum, La Belle Assemblée, Sunday Times, Gc. Gt
In a handsome Post 8vo. Volume, Price 9s. cloth.
*,.° A few Impressions of the Illustrations are taken off on India Paper,
ite Ss.
LECTIONES LATIN;
Or, LESSONS IN LATIN LITERATURE:
Being a: choice Collection of Amusing and Instructive Pieces, in
Prose and Verse, selected from: the Writings of the-most celebrated
Latin Authors.
IN FOUR PARTS.
Part I1.—An Interlinear, Literal,and Free Trauslation.
Part IIl.—A Poetic Translation, and an Ordo with a Literal Trans-
ation.
Part [1].—An Ordo, with a Liferal and’ Free Translation.
Part IV.—A ‘ranslation of the most difficult Words and Phrases.
Preceded hy an Introductory Grammar; and interspersed with various
Grammatical Notes, and other Explanations.
ADAPTED FOR SCHOOLS AND PRIVATE STUDENTS.
By J. ROWBOTHAM, F.R.A.8. Lonpon,
Author of German Lessons, French Lessons, a German Grammar, a French Grammar.
Algebra and Key, 4c.
12 . POETRY.~-DOMESTIC POLITY.
POETRY.
POPP PO LP.
A TALE OF TUCUMAN.
WITH DIGRESSIONS, ENGLISH AND AMERICAN.
- By JUNIUS REDIVIVUS.
Stat nominis umbra.
Meaning, that I my name will tell you some day.
** Passion !” cried the phantom dim;
*¢ | loved my country, and I hated him !”
‘* Our author is one of the right thinkers; and what he thinks well, he speaks
bgldly, and without pausing to consider whether he is, or is not, wounding the esta-
blished prejudices of our amour propre.” —Ezaminer.
._In Post 12mo., price 5s.
Om
POEMS, CHIEFLY LYRICAL.
By ALFRED TENNYSON,
Of Trinity College, Cambridge.
'.*¢ We are extremely pleased. with Mr. Tennyson. * * © * * Some of his scat-
tered thoughts are eminently beautiful.” —Atias.
‘Mr. Tennyson has made some very touching and some very animating melodies;
he is master of musical combinations; his Songs set themselves, and generate their
own tunes, as all Songs do.which are good for.anything.”— Westminster Review.
In One Volume, Foolscap‘8vo., 5s. boards.
THE PARSON’S HORN-BOOK.
By THE COMET LITERARY AND PATRIOTIC CLUB.
** Oh for a forty-parson-power to chaunt
«s Thy praise, Hypocrisy !” Byron.
‘Embellished with Numerous Engravings. Two Parts in 1 Volume.
' Cloth boards, price 10s. 6d.
‘Part II. separate. Price’5s., cloth.
DOMESTIC POLITY.
PP OPOPOPDOBD OP OODLE OP OD
FAOTS RELATING TO THE PUNISHMENT OF
DEATH IN THE METROPOLIS.
Second Edition. With an Appendix, concerning Murper ror THE
SaLE oF THE Deap Bony.
By: EDWARD GIBBON WAKEFIELD, Esq.
~ In One Volume, 8vo., Price 7s. 6d. boards. — -
‘‘ To Mr. Wakefield we are indebted for a masterly exposition of this subject.”
° Examiner.
FACTS,
Shewing the Workings of the Boroucu System in Church and
State; and how the Rerorm Brtu will benefit the People! being
Extracts from the EXTRAORDINARY BLACK BOOK.
Price One Penny, or 5s. per 100.
DOMESTIC POLITY, 13
NEW AND IMPROVED EDITION OF “THE BLACK BOOK.”
Enlarged and corrected to March, 1832, and complete in One Volume
8vo.; embellished with Portraits of the Friends of the Reform Bill,
Price 18s.,
THE EXTRAORDINARY BLACK BOOK;
An Exposition of Public Abuses in Church, State, Courts of Law,
Representation, and Corporate Bodies: with an Address to Alarmists
and Reformers; and a Précis of the House of Commons, past, pre-
sent, and to come.
Besides correction, this Edition has been greatly enlarged, especially
the articles on the Cuurca, Banx, and East Inpra Company, and new
Chapters added on the State of Corporations in the chief Cities and
Towns ; the Principles and Working of Taxation, with valuable Statis-
tical Tables illustrative of the Ecclesiastical Patronage of each of the
Nobility, of Finance, the Reform Bill, Representation, House of Lords,
Commons, East India Company, Bank, Inns of Court, Trinity College,
Clerical Magistracy, Colonies, Irish Tithes, Church Rates, Dissenters, &c.
‘* We have more than once called the attention of our readers to the ExTRAORDI-
wary Buack Book. The oftener we look at this catalogue of the crimes of an
irresponsible Government, the more we are astonished at the patient endurance of the
people. Nothing but the Ministerial plan of Parliameatary Reform can prevent a
repetition of the groas injustice which this book so ably exposes!!! If there can
now be found any disinterested man, be he Lord or be he Commoner, who has a rational
doubt on this important question, we say to him again and again, read the ExrTna-
ORDINARY BLACK Boox.”—Moerning Chronicle. .
ON THE
REVENUES OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND,
Exhibiting the Rise and Progress of Ecclesiastical Taxation.
Bry GEORGE COVENTRY, .
AUTHOR oF ‘* AN ENQUIRY RELATIVE TO JUNIUS.”
‘* We have been well repaid for our perusal of chis work, by meeting with much
that is new, interesting, and important.”’— Atheneum.
In One Volume 8vo. Price 6s. boards.
PLAN OF PARLIAMENTARY REFORM,
WITH REASONS FOR EVERY ARTICLE.
With an Introduction, shewing the Necessity of Radical, and the
Inadequacy of Moderate Reform.
By JEREMY BENTHAM, Esa.
Second Edition; in One Volume 8vo., Price 5s. boards.
INTRODUCTION TO THE PRINCIPLES OF
MORALS AND LEGISLATION.
By JEREMY BENTHAM, Esa.
“In this work the author has given to the public his enlarged and enlightened
views, and has laboured for all nations, and for ages yet to come.”-——Edinb. Review.
Second Edition ; in Two Vols. 8vo. with Portrait, £1 ; 1s. boards.
A few: Proof Impressions of the Portrait, on quarto size, may be had
separately, Price 5s.
14 SPORTS AND PASTIMES.
FRAGMENT ON GOVERNMENT,
Being a Critique on Blackstone’s Commentaries.
By JEREMY BENTHAM, Esa.
*¢ English Uterature handly- affords any specimens: of a more correct; concise, and
perspicuous style, than that of the Fragment on Gove:nment.”—Kdinb. Review.
Second Edition; 8vo., Price 8s. boards.
—
ELEMENTS OF THE ART OF PACKING
As applied to Special Juries.
By JEREMY BENTHAM, Ese.
In One Voume 8vo., Price 10s. 6d. boards.
NABRATIVE OF THE CONDITION OF
THE MANUFACTURING POPULATION;
SUD THE PROGEEDENGS OF GOVERNMENT WHICH LED TO THE
State Trials in Scotland,
For administrating Unlawful Oaths, and the Suspension of the He-
beas Corpus Act, in 1817; with a detailed Account of the System of
Espionage adopted at that period in Glasgow and its Neighbourhood.
Also, a Summary of similar Proceedings, in other parts of the
Country, to the Execution of Thistlewood and others, for High
Treason, in 1820.
By ALEXANDER B. RICHMOND.
In One Vol., Price 6s. boards.
SSS a TOD
SPORTS AND PASTIMES.
Ennotent Amusements for Douth.
RECREATIONS IN SCIENCE,
OR,
A COMPLETE SERIES OF RATIONAL AMUSEMENT.
By the Author of ‘‘ Endless Amusement.”
In 18mo. Illustrated by numerous Engravings. Price 3s. 6d.
‘* A very valuable addition to popular science has just been made by a little
publication called ‘ RacreaTions in Science.’ It possesses the singular advantage
of only describing those experiments that can be performed with the aid of simple
apparatus.” — Atias. :
On a neat Coloured Card, Price 1s.
PRINTED IN GOLD, SILVER, AND BRONZE,
A LABYRINTH:
Formed of a variety of Trees, Shrubs, Water, c.
Intended as an amusement for Young People. The object is the discovery of the Road
to the Temple, by means of one of the numerous paths with which it is intersected.
Whilst its intricacy excites in the explorer a spirit of emulation, it does not induce
a propensity to gaming, which is inseparable from many of the amusements of youth.
MISCELLANEOUS LITERATURE: 15
THE ROYAL BOOK OF DREAMS,
FROM AN ANCIENT AND CURIOUS MANUSCRIPT,
Which has been buried in the Earth during several Centuries.
CONTAINING
One Thousand and Twenty-four Oracles, or Answers to Dreams ;
by a curious yet perfectly facile and easy Method, void of all abstruse
or difficult Calculations, whereby any Person of ordina capacity
may discover those Secrets of Fate, which the universal Fiat of all
Nations, in every Age and Clime, has acknowledged to be portended
by Dreams and Nocturnal Visions.
BY RAPHASL,
Member of the Astronomical Society of London, Author of ** The Astrologer of the.
Nineteenth Century,” ‘‘ The Prophetic Messenger,” $c.
«¢ We have seen nothing like it. The oracles are the truest we ever met. with.
We have tried them again and again, and they have never yet deceived us. We
consult the baok the first thing we do every morning, and we advise all our readers
to do the same.”——-Edinburgh Literary Journal.
«¢ We can safely recommend this book as an entertaining and ingenious work, and
certainly the best on the subject that has yet been given to the public.”"— Olio.
With a beautiful Emblematical Frontispiece by Cruikshank:
In One Vol. 12mo., Price 5s.
——————
MISCELLANEOUS LITERATURE.
MR. GODWIN’S NEW WORK.
THOUGHTS ON MAN,
His Nature, Productions, and Discoveries, Interspersed with some
Particulars respecting the Author.
By WILLIAM GODWIN, Ese.
Author of ‘‘ Tog HIsToRY oF THE COMMONWEALTH.”
Each of these Essays treats of some new and interesting truth, or of
some old truth under a fresh aspect, which has never by any prece-
ding writer been laid before the Public.
*« The result of thirty years’ meditations of the author of the ‘ Inquiry into Poli-
tical Justice,’ are well entitled to consideration. Sound reason and humane principles
form the essence of this excellent volume; which, being the production of a thinking
man, will be a fountain for thoughts in all his readers.” — Literary Gazette.
In One Vol. 8vo. Price 14s. boards.
WILSON’S WEW STRANGER’S GUIDE
THROUGH LONDON AND ITS ENVIRONS.
Or, a Portable Cicerone; containing every species of information,
a Coloured Map, and many useful Tables. Price 2s. 6d.
‘‘ A Guide to the Curiosities, Places of Amusement, &c. all of which it briefly
describes, and also informs what is the price of admission to each. It furnishes all
information to strangers visiting London. The Map of London and its
Vicinity, with which it is embellished, will be found very useful for reference : it is
well engraved, drawn with singular clearness, and richly worth the price of the
‘Guide.’ Altogether, it is the cheapest half-crown’s worth we have met for some
time.”=——_Carlisie Patriot.
The same Work is to be had in French, Price 2s. 6d.
16 MISCELLANEOUS LITERATURE.
HAZLITT’S LIFE OF NAPOLEON;
NOW COMPLETED.
Tue first and second volumes of this admirable piece of biography
have met a rapid sale. The character of Napoleon—divested of the
specks which political feeling had cast upon it—appears in this work
alone with its full lustre. The author had no prejudices to overcome,
no party to conciliate; his object has been truth, and an unbiassed
view of the actual character of his hero is the result of his inquiries.
The third and fourth volumes, now first presented to the public, as-
sume the character of a posthumous publication. Napoleon and his
biographer equally belong to a time which is passed away.
The death of Wittiam Hazuitr on the eve of the completion of
his greatest work, is a coincidence which adds to its interest, and the
public will feel the claim which such a work, at such a period, inde-
pendently of its intrinsic merit, has on its protection and support.
Four Vols. 8vo. Price 2/. 10s.
*,* For the convenience of those who have already bought Vols.
I. and II. of this interesting piece of Biography, the third and fourth. -
Volumes will be sold separately for a limited time, Price 12. 10s.
MATERIALS FOR THINKING.
By WILLIAM BURDON, Ese.
WITH THE LIFE OF THE AUTHOR, BY GEORGE ENSOR, ESQ. .
Contents.
Liberality of Sentiment.—Human Inconsistencies.—The Imagina- -
tion.—-Characters.—The Feelings.—Education.—British Constitu-
tion.—Political Economy.—The State of Society.—The principal
Moral Writers, and Systems of Morality considered and compared.—
The Condition of Mortality examined.—Liberty and Necessity.—
Remarks on the Bible Societies.
Fifth Edition, in Two Vols. 8vo., Price 16s. boards.
COINS.
A NUMISMATIC MANUAL; or, Guide to the Study of Grezx,
Roman, and Enoutsa Corns, with their degrees of rarity, and the
price at which some ofthe most curious have been sold.
. By JOHN Y. ACKERMAN.
In this volume will be found, a condensation of the works of Snelling, Folkes,
Pinkerton, Reeding, Cardonnel, Simon, Mionnet, &c. ; with such corrections as time
and experience have proved necessary.
‘¢ We can recommend the Numismatic Manual to the young and inexperienced.” —
Atlas, Feb. 12.
*¢ All who are curious in ancient colns and medals are recommended to possess
themselves of this little book. The engravings are very curious and elegant.»—— Weekly
Dispatch.
In One Vol. Foolscap, Cloth, with 50 Fac-similes of rare and
curious Coins, Price 8s.
A GUIDE TO AUTHORS,
SHEWING HOW TO CORRECT THE PRESS,
According to the Mode adopted and understood by Printers,
Price 6d.
ove
PRINTED BY MAURICF AND CO., FENCHURCH STREET.
Pa ais o € a
CGZe@A- 5 /
Inf
, 3 2044 020 883 476
.
‘
t
1
t
, 32044 020 8683 476
Live Music
Archive
Librivox
Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland
Museum of Art
Internet
Arcade
Console Living Room
Open Library
American
Libraries
TV News
Understanding
9/11